This is more common in other fields especially in a finance domain.

My experience at HFs is you will get fired immediately if you are a low performer. Immediately.

I have a apple Visio pro, I personally think it is a very good device, control by finger is impressive, except it is way too expensive

Not it's biggest problem and before you think it's lack of killer app I would say it's form factor. Get that right and people wearing it more often and naturally the applications will come. Yea Meta onto this now with Rayban tie-up

The difference between a million dollars and a billion dollars is about a billion dollars. The difference between Meta 'smart' sunglasses and an AR headset is an AR headset. How are they 'onto' anything by selling sunglasses with a sneaky phone camera strapped to them? People wear them like sunglasses, because they are?

Curious what the problem what the form factor is? I wear it several hours a day every day and have had no complaints.

(I will say I use the double-loop strap instead of the adjustable head-band you see in the ads all the time. The top loop seems to take enough weight off of your cheeks where it's comfortable enough for all-day wear)

I'd love to try one, but their price in my country (Australia) is absolutely bonkers. For the same money I could literally buy a perfectly usable secondhand car.

If it was at most, the same cost as a Macbook Pro or ideally a Macbook Air I might think about getting one.

I think the real difference is experts can tell you what he is good at and admits what he is not good at but imitators cannot

I think the best alternative for JQ is datawave, but it is not open source. https://dataweave.mulesoft.com/

The latest blog post is about open sourcing it from last September. So the process of open sourcing dataweave takes at least 15 months.

It have some learning curve, but it actually makes sense when you get used to it and work for other format too. It is much better than other transformation language, and you can even call Java.

I think they kind of stuck in the development, even the mule engine only have one active developer from the github commit ….

It depends on your end goals, if your target is to find a job, implement some feature without going into too details. Not every people like to deals with the implementation details. Being a generalist is the road.

For example, many people just know how use React components, Angular components. But that’s ok in many jobs become there is no strict UI requirement on many jobs.

However, If your endpoint is to write components with design system / customise / optimise the components a little bit, you really need to understand how CSS and JS works.

The biggest pitfall I think is career development, if you are too generalist and your knowledge just stays on the surface, you just can’t solve some problems with technical complexity. It is hard to know what you don’t know … and some problems need expertise.

I think OOP as a way of abstraction. It make sense to abstraction something in OOP style, for example, collection such as LinkedList, Stack.

But sometime it is too verbose to use OOP, for example lambda vs anonymous listener. The biggest problem is it is easy to do wrong abstraction with OOP style, for example, store state that make no sense and put weird method inside a class

I believe they tried to keep the C# version independently from the framework version, so people can use the new C# version on a old .net framework.

But things seem impossible for some new features, for example async steam just need new feature from core CLR.

So after .C#8, they decide only to support it on .NET core

I think the value of unit test is to test the logic in software abstraction instead of relying on external dependencies, but I believe many unit test is just for the sake of unit test

I would say many examples in the book is just for demo. In real life, it have to trade off somethings

They change a lot in the build system in recent years and completely confuse people