Nevermind PC games, think about how this would impact mobile games. Where you get TONS of transient installs, and very few consistent players.

You could actually go into debt by using unity, and accidentally being successful if you aren't abusively monitizing your game.

This is what fundamental scientific illiteracy gets you.

When you have no reference point for how the world around you works anything makes sense.

The CEO is a right wing trump worshiper.

Dig into the company's tweet history, and find archived tweets that were deleted for PR/white-washing reasons.

Long history of this stuff.

Multi-cloud is a significant amount of effort to pull off.

Being on one cloud provider across multiple regions is often plenty of redundancy.

Being available across multiple cloud providers is really REALLY difficult

Given how many people think that railguns have no recoil because "there is no explosion" they might actually seriously believe what they just wrote.

Scientific illiteracy is through the roof.

Or maybe it's the same as it it's always been it's just that people that are scientifically illiterate are given platforms to speak their illiteracy as truth.

Never not UTC Everywhere.

https://utceverywhere.com/

There are markup languages for this purpose. And you store the rich text as normal text in that markup language. For the most part.

It's typically an XML or XML-like language, or bb-codes. MS Word for example uses XML to store the markup data for the rich text.

Simpler and more limited text needs tend to use markdown these days, like Lemmy, or most text fields on GitHub.

There's no need to include complex technology stacks into it!

Now the real hard part is the rendering engine for WYSIWYG. That's a nightmare.

And what does it imply?

That an AI might be better at writing documentation than the average dev, who is largely inept at writing good documentation?

Understandably, as technical writing isn't exactly a focus point or career growing thing for most devs. If it was, we would be writing much better code as well.

I've seen my peers work, they could use something like this. I'd welcome it.

I work remote (Going on 9 years now) and I miss a sense of community. Do I want to stop working remotely? Hell no, screw that. But two things can be true the same time, I can enjoy and encourage them at work, dnd I can also miss a sense of community.

I think it's okay to hold this opinion because it's individual to everyone.

This just comes across as propaganda

Being dismissive and pulling the rhetoric that this is propaganda is toxic as fuck.

Equal and opposite reaction.

There's a law for this. The matter is "pushing" against the ship, it doesn't have to push against anything else.

In fact having an atmosphere to push against actually reduces the effectiveness of thrust due to atmospheric pressure, which must be overcome. Which is why different engines are designed to run in atmosphere versus out of atmosphere.

If you throw a baseball in space you have transferred momentum to that baseball, pushing you back. You will move in the opposite direction (likely spin because you just imparted angular momentum onto yourself since you didn't throw from center of mass)

I go full chaos and look up where I last used it when I need a snippet...

Am I saying you are scientifically illiterate?

Based on the previous statements, yes. However, as a matter of fact, not necessarily insult.

The good news is you're following up with questions and want to learn more, instead of doubling down. With curiosity you will become more literate.

Maybe you were born with all the knowledge of the human race, but the rest of us have to learn it.

The education system in the country you are from has failed you. Assuming you are in your mid-late teens, or older, scientific topics should have already been taught in what North America would call "middle school" (11-14 years old). That teaches you things like conservation of momentum.

There is a reason why it's called illiteracy, because there is an expectation that the baseline level of education everyone in developed countries receives teaches them the fundamentals of how the world around them works. Without this fundamental understanding it's not possible to understand more complex topics that build upon it, stunting growth.

If you do this enough you know how to design your solutions to be relatively flexible. At least for your backends.

Your frontend will always churn, that's the nature of the job.

Because your conservative funded news outlets have a very overt goal here.

They're not on to anything here. As further stated by your comment.

Good news, they have these, and you even get paid to do it!

Not nearly enough mind you.

The number of new devs who complain about having to write a unit test is too damn high

• Or writing integration tests
• Or passing CI
• Or following repo conventions
• Or following standards
• Or adhering to domain guardrails
• Or in adding monitoring
• Or in not logging everything as info
• Or in actually documenting features
• Or in receiving critical PR review
• Or in addition input validation
• Or in not trusting the client

...etc

Honestly most devs.... Kinda suck at their job. This is becoming more evident to me every year

Isn't this an entire class of problems that's avoidable by using strict DDD-style entities?

You don't have the same "purists" OOP problems, you don't have extension methods to get lost in, you don't have publicly mutable state, and you have a clear surface area for state changes. And your ORM is happy.

Purists OOP has all sorts of issues, more procedural, pragmatic, approaches can alleviate that pain. And strict entities provide the same surface area as the functional approach, without concerns over breaking ORM tracking. With the added benefits of closely guarding local state.

Opinion time.

This is less "what you can't do in OOP" and more "what you can't do if you use OOP design as dogma" 🤔. Perhaps that's an important distinction to make, depending on your viewership, but to me this feels like a solution looking for a contrived problem.

I do feel like C# saw C++ and said "let's do that" in a way.

One of the biggest selling points about the language is the long-term and cross repo/product/company..etc consistency. Largely the language will be very recognizable regardless of where it's written and by who it's written due to well established conventions.

More and more ways to do the same thing but in slightly different ways is nice for the sake of choices but it's also making the language less consistent and portable.

While at the same time important language features like discriminated unions are still missing. Things that other languages have started to build features for by default. C# is incredibly "clunky" in comparison to say Typescript solely from a type system perspective. The .Net ecosystem of course more than makes up for any of this difference, but it's definitely not as enjoyable to work with the language itself.

This is a weird take given that the majority of projects relevant to this article are massive projects with hundreds or thousands of developers working on them, over time periods that can measure in decades.

Pretending those don't exist and imagining fantasy scenarios where all large projects are made up of small modular pieces (while conveniently making no mention to all of the new problems this raises in practice).

Replace functions replace files and rewrite modules, that's expected and healthy for any project. This article is referring to the tendency for programmers to believe that an entire project should be scrapped and rewritten from scratch. Which seems to have nothing to do with your comment...?