The tone here isn't great but parent is more correct than not. This is why large companies don't use freebie services. They vet companies and partners, sign enterprise deals with support, SLAs, penalties, insurance, even bonds in some cases. It costs more, and it's hardly fun for most people, but it's all part of mitigating those risks. And it's not just tech, you see the same thing in non-tech industries like manufacturing.
It really isn't. Most businesses export core business functions to a third party in some way. This is just a snotty navel gazing post without much content that was responded to in kind.
It's completely reasonable to use adsense to generate revenue and then be upset when they inevitably fuck you (and they will). It's not a chance to make a (completely uninformed) "ah, that's your own fault" comment, deflecting from scumbag practices google engages in.
Basically the difference between sympathy and empathy. You can validate someone's feelings by simply acknowledging them (sympathy, "I'm sorry you feel upset about that, how can I help?"), or you can participate in that emotion (empathy, "Yeah, that pisses me off too! Let's fix it.").
Neither is definitively better or worse, sincerity is paramount, and it's all contextual, including the personality of the person involved. I think aligning on what mix to use is possibly the most important thing in a relationship, especially a professional one.
I agree with you, but that's a hard sell to many people.
There's been a large amount of social conditioning over the past few generations in America that says that if even a tiny slice of the population would abuse a program, that program is worse than the problem itself.
Anyone who's volunteered at something like a food bank will have seen the person in the nice car and nice clothes show up and take food and it requires an unfortunately rare level of benevolence to just move on and remember that you're there for the far larger number of people who really need it.
> social conditioning over the past few generations in America that says that if even a tiny slice of the population would abuse a program, that program is worse than the problem itself
This problem is sort of caused by how hard Americans work. If you’re working two jobs to make ends meet, it is insulting to see someone lazing on the perceived fruits of your labour.
But now you get the fruits as well, and only have to work one job. The perceived insult will feel lessened, would be even more without one side constantly telling you to feel aggrieved over it.
Does it though? Revenues are off their 90s peaks, but coming back[1], and keep in mind that in the 90s a _huge_ portion (~50%) of that went to the retail store and physical media manufacturing.
Well, it really wasn't that bad. People were more selective about what they listened to but the average person probably spent about what they do today on streaming.
(Which also probably sets some ceiling on streaming prices and digital entertainment more broadly.)
I'm not sure selective is the right word, there were just far fewer choices. A typical record store would have O(thousands) of different titles, whereas spotify has over 100 million. Obviously much of that is trash, but it's still a huge difference.
It's also worth noting that a big contributor to the 90s spike was people replacing tapes/records with CDs, which were a far superior medium for most usage. The decline after 2000 was not streaming, since that didn't exist, but the wind-down of the upgrade cycle and the rise of file sharing and 0.99 digital track purchases in lieu of $15-20 album purchases.
I agree with most of that though I probably had access to better record stores than was the norm. And yeah digital purchases were never huge but a lot of that as you say was because people often bought single tracks. In fact if you did want an entire album it often made sense to purchase a CD and rip it.
> I never saw a kid that can't ride this instantly.
As a data point, we tried this with my son, who is physically very capable if not advanced, and despite many attempts over months, it never clicked for him. We eventually went the training wheels route, which he instantly adopted, and once he was comfortable on that for a while, he learned to ride without them in a single session.
We've since met other parents who had similar experiences, so I think it's definitely not a universal thing that balance bikes are better or even useful.
Same with my daughter. We tried with balance bike, but she didn't adopt it and didn't find it fun to try. We went to training wheels and she was immediately motivated. And at the same time, I've heard success stories with balance bikes from my friends.
This, in my opinion, proves that different people might need different things. And, in turn, many immensely able and skilled ones fail at standard route (e.g. successful writers fail at school).
It’s fairy obvious but I like to keep this poka-yoke’ish concept in mind: it’s not about the person, it’s about the process.
I can't wait for IntelliJ to get where Cursor appears to be. Being able to combine a great IDE with project-level AI coding will be a huge leap forward.
I'm going to feel personally offended if Jetbrains drops the ball on this.
Seriously, this here right now is the precise moment in time where people will either look back at wondering how such a clear leader managed to sink into insignificance, or not.
I love IntelliJ more than my own kids, but if they don't add "the AI does not just talk about what code to create, it actually creates it, across multiple files and folders", then I'm out.
Just yesterday I made Cursor rewrite the whole ui layer of my app from light-mode-only to light-and-dark-mode-with-switcher in one single sweep, in less than 5 minutes (it would have taken me hours, if not days to do it manually), and this is just not feasible if you have to manually copy-and-paste whatever Jetbrains AI spits out.
My experience mirrors this exactly. I loved WebStorm, but I can't use it anymore because Cursor is just a massive productivity booster for things like what you're describing.
Claude 3.5 + Cursor has fundamentally improved my productivity. It's worth the 20 dollars a month.
I've written thousands of lines of Vitest tests with it, and they have come out near perfect. It would have taken me days to write those tests by hand, but now I can just generate them and review each to make sure it works.
Intellij will have it's lunch eaten if it doesn't pursue the Cursor/Windsurf editing modality.
I keep them both open on the same project, as there are some things IntelliJ does superbly.
I evaluated Jetbrains AI and Copilot with VSCode, but they just didn't impress me. I tried Cursor, and subscribed a couple of days into the trial. The workflow is just right.
+1, I've had mine for 5+ years and it is still genuinely a joy to use. I went with the "buy your last tool first" approach and splurged on a 5HP ICS and don't regret a single penny spent on it.
They can both be dangerous but one difference is that the band saw _seems_ much less dangerous and people would take it less seriously. In a shop full of adolescent novices I could see this causing more injuries whereas the tablesaw is probably more closely supervised and people will respect it more.
I'd say overall a tablesaw is more dangerous compared to a band saw because it has the additional failure mode of kickback which happens occasionally even to very experienced operators.
I think that's probably it. The band-saw didn't really look different or more intimidating than the jigsaws we had previously been using. The table-saw looks like it wants to kill you.
> === How to Learn in the First Place
>
> (1) Play with something.
> (2) Read the documentation on it.
> (3) Play with it some more.
> (4) Read documentation again.
> (5) Play with it some more.
(6) You're starting to learn it! Now fix the documentation
