How many scenarios are there where the rename both matters (beyond taste and philosophy) and is across interface boundaries?
Surely if it is an advantage to rename once in a ginormous, single code base there must also be leaky abstractions, poorly defined interfaces, god objects, etc present at the same time?
Whenever I find I need to rename anything across domains, it's a matter of updating the "core" repository and then just pulling the newest version.
You said you weren't a software development team. What kind of functions do you have?
For me, and most people I've worked with, having an all-day meeting specifically to mimic the open office is not something we'd ever propose ourselves. Was it a bottom-up or a top-down decision? Is everyone happy with it?
Would rephrase it to not only SW team but also consulting.
The meeting grew organically: When I started in Corona times I had a few meetings a day with my mentor to talk about open points and questions. From there it evolved to a permanent meeting, also with others joining.
Attending the meeting is not mandatory; everybody is free to join and leave whenever they want. Some use it more regularly, some don't. I haven't heard of anybody not being happy with it.
This isn't about architecture so much as implementation, though. Would you prefer to look at a sequence diagram there, or actual code?
To me, only the code is real because it can be run and is the product. UML is great for niche cases, but it doesn't represent the truth well, and is usually at least one time increment out of sync with reality.
How? Seems to me that if they're storing (and handing over) data that allows trivial account takeover, they have a broken security process to begin with.
Five hours a week is no small investment. Focusing on calories/kJ in < out is much easier as it can be done incrementally, such as by not eating past a certain time of day, leaving out especially high sugar snacks, etc. There is no getting around obesity being a dietary issue.
That said, it's definitely not an either/or situation.
GPs point is that exercise can help with those things: if you feel less hungry (because of leptin), you fill eat less calories or fewer snacks (or healthier ones).
What you're describing is leadership, just not the popular style. To put terms to it, you weren't doing Taylorist command and control, you were doing servant leadership.
In my opinion, yours is the only sane way to lead. With command and control, all you would be doing is creating the illusion of control, providing no actual added value. If your leadership style is adversarial, you're stimulating your employees to see you as a liability.
Mostly, yes, but it comes down to moderation and subreddit culture. Reddit - as a company - doesn't take moderation seriously, as evidenced by it being left to unpaid volunteers.
Just use Google. Reddit's built in search is useless in comparison. Yesterday I found a great thread about suit tailors in my city. The posts were all 3 years old but fortunately the tailor was still active. Digging up this info would be impossible on Discord, because at best I'd be locating individual comments asking about the topic, then scroll down to see if anybody bothered to post a response instead of changing the topic to something else.
I would disagree, searching for a topic or question on any search engine and appending 'reddit' gets me reddit discussions that are frequently relevant to my question (game tips, bugs encountered in some software, often real user reviews for products, etc).
Reddit's redesign is annoying and their own search isn't great but the alternative sources for a lot of communal information is completely inaccessible. I cannot search Google for Discord conversations and get information about my Lenovo laptop's rear thunderbolt port misbehaving, even though I witnessed that conversation take place multiple times on the unofficial Legion Discord community. If you're not on Discord and sort of active in a community it might as well not exist.
The legal follow-up could be better. The exacted fines should actually follow the law instead of being softened. With at least 4% of gross revenue in every instance, it would have bite and act to curb the excesses, thereby tackling the root problem. After all, it was never meant to outlaw data collection, just excessive surveillance.
> The annoying cookie banners
The GDPR isn't unclear about what companies can collect, what consent should be asked and how. Those banners are malicious compliance or non-compliance. They're purposefully built that way to get you as a potential consumer riled up about the regulation. And it's working: instead of talking about the companies trying to abuse your data and implementing horrible popups that don't do what the law says they should, you're now upset at the regulators. Classic case of "Don't like what they're saying? Change the narrative".
> And it's working: instead of talking about the companies trying to abuse your data and implementing horrible popups that don't do what the law says they should, you're now upset at the regulators.
Actually I'm upset at both the companies using dark patterns and the horribly designed cookie regulations.
> except for the extremely strong willed, [...] addicting
Addiction isn't about willpower so much as psychopathology and genetics. It's a coping mechanism.
> getting used to a serene state of mind is [...] kind of counter productive
What is suspect about serenity? Is religion equally problematic as a source? How is it counterproductive?
> such substances are not natural and
A naturalist argument is usually invalid. We can't expand upon the rules of the universe. Plastics are just as natural as anything else. Cannabis also doesn't induce any foreign states in our brains.
Even using the narrow definition of "can't be found in the wild": cannabis is a plant, so it very much does exist in the wild. So do alcohol, caffeine, nicotine, psilocybin ("magic mushrooms") or ergotamine (LSD).
When applied to brain chemistry: to my knowledge, drugs don't do novel things to our brains. They promote infrequent states, but that doesn't make them unnatural. Especially not if you consider how alien dream states, meditative and transcendental experiences feel.
> with unchecked use, might put a whole society in danger
Adding a slippery slope to it doesn't improve your line of reasoning. It does tend to whip the masses into a frenzy, like its cousins "Won't somebody think of the children" and "Why should we help those who won't help themselves?".
It also doesn't conform to reality. Have California or Colorado collapsed because weed was legalised? Have the Netherlands?
> I am ambivalent about the whole movement to legalize it
Decriminalisation seems obvious to me as a solution, if coupled with a sorely needed investment in mental healthcare (across the West). The latter is necessary regardless of how we consider drugs - see homelessness, domestic violence, suicide, burnouts, etc. Decriminalisation works (cf Portugal's results), dries up income sources for the cartels, allows quality controls to be put in place, reduces stigmatisation for users, lowers the threshold for seeking therapy, keeps people out of prison for victimless crimes, creates a revenue source for the government through sales and other taxes...
The alternative to decriminalisation is telling the population "we know best". Looking at the so-called war on drugs globally, it's also an endeavour that's bound to fail, strengthen drug cartels, escalate violence and cause more damage than it prevents.
Surely if it is an advantage to rename once in a ginormous, single code base there must also be leaky abstractions, poorly defined interfaces, god objects, etc present at the same time?
Whenever I find I need to rename anything across domains, it's a matter of updating the "core" repository and then just pulling the newest version.