Honestly you are the first person I’ve ever heard that prefers chromes tab system. Check out tree style tabs it’ll change your life. I hate chrome now solely due to it
I installed it to see. I don't want something on the "side" - I want the tab organization to be on the top where the tabs ordinarily live anyway. That's what the Chrome tab groups does well. I can just visually see which tabs are grouped together, and collapse all of them.
I haven't used chrome tab system, but Safari's tab groups are nice. Point being, most other browser, including esoteric ones like Vivaldi, have a way to organize tabs beyond simple order and moving them to other windows. If you are in a corporate environment, it is unlikely a user can install extensions like sideberry.
Tab groups in Chrome are a relatively new feature (and might still be behind an experimental feature flag, or at least the ability to save tab groups might be).
They're a game changer; so much better than using a third party extension IMO.
>Tab groups in Chrome are a relatively new feature
I'm gonna die on this hill but I'd like to add that Opera had tab groups natively without extensions since 2010 [1]. Damn I feel old now.
Also, UX of tab groups in old-Opera was way nicer than current-Chrome since you could just drag and drop tabs on top of another and it would automatically create groups.
Being the scale of Amazon has nothing to do with whether or not fault-tolerance is important to an application. In fact, amazon has far fewer real needs for fault-tolerance than many other businesses (its a retail site!).
You should use embedded mode if you do not require fault-tolerance and can miss updates. Otherwise, don't. Regardless of scale.
It depends - usually moving computation closer together is much more performant. You may be underutilizing your DB or spending a lot of roundtrips on networking and this is a good way to reclaim that. It does not prevent you from having services - it just reduces the #.
yeah this is where traits instead of hierarchies become useful - I should be able to implement the Hash interface for an object I do not own and then use that object + trait going forward for HashMap and HashSet.
Should be noted that Rust (one of the most prominent languages with traits) doesn't allow you to implement a trait for an object you do not own. A common workaround is to wrap that object in your own tuple struct and then implement the trait for that struct.
(If you don’t own the trait either, that is. Your own traits can be implemented for foreign types.)
Rust’s approach to the Hash and Eq problem is to make them opt-in but provide a derive attribute that autoimplements them with minimal boilerplate for most types.
Also, Rust’s Hash::hash implementations don’t actually hash anything themselves, they just pass the relevant parts of the object to a Hasher passed as a parameter. This way types aren’t stuck with just a single hash implementation, and normal programmers don’t need to worry about primes and modular arithmetic.
Java uses this pattern in some places, for example you can usually pass a custom Comparator to anything that needs comparisons (like sorts).
Fully separating implementation of an interface from the data can create quite a lot of additional complexities. See my comment elsewhere about encapsulation and version stability.
But the upgrade....didnt go as planned? In what way was it a misrepresentation? It was certainly generic but definitely not exaggerated. Felt fine for an editorialized title
There is no crime wave. I’m an SF resident and lived in SOMA for much of Covid. This is mostly manufactured BS and does not justify surveillance by an irresponsible police force who can’t solve the crimes they see happen in front of their own faces
Let me guess, you lived in a modern high rise apartment/condo? I've lived here for more than 10 years and have personally witnessed more crime in the past 2 years than I had ever seen before.
No one is "manufacturing" this. There's a reason the DA was recalled, and it's not because SF residents were "tricked by Republicans".
Police are of course part of this, but are prosecutors, and lawmakers.
You can be pedantic and say there's no "crime wave", but there is absolutely a discernible increase in crime.
perhaps if you are driven and understand what you are supposed to be working on remote work is not a tall order. School, on the other hand, is not intrinsically as interesting as whatever career you chose. You don't get paid. You are younger (and thus may be less able to concentrate on boring tasks).
They are different. In some contexts more than others but still different. I love going into the office but pretending its magically more efficient is a bit silly. I like getting distracted at work but don't think it makes me more valuable to the company. I certainly don't write better code at work - if anything my home office allows me to shut out distractions more easily (a luxury not everyone has). This entire argument is silly - not allowing remote work is denying a large portion of a workforce. That workforce may or may not be better or worse but its certainly cheaper for the employer. Why deny yourself a large talent pool?
> School, on the other hand, is not intrinsically as interesting as whatever career you chose
Also, modern mass-schooling was built largely on the model of, and to prepare to, industrial production processes.
People get taught at early age that they have to go somewhere to listen to some authority, who will assign them tasks they may or may not care about, and they will be rewarded if such tasks are successfully executed. Tasks will become increasingly complex with time, but such progression is largely not managed by pupils. They are controlled very strictly at every step, and there is little or no flexibility or power for them to control their day: they must congregate in specific buildings at specific times, and then act as requested.
Is it surprising, then, that most of them might need such structure reproduced later in life...? Maybe if we taught them more self-direction earlier on, there would be a smaller risk of "loss of productivity when unchecked".
