dickersnoodle

Use Swift.

No.

Word. Most companies don't have nearly enough data to begin to justify them.

Good luck with that. I'm one of a handful of people on a team that maintains a native iOS app and the powers that be want to transition it to be a minimalistic container for a React web app so they can "just design it once and push changes without needing a separate App Store submission". I can fight that only so long, and then we need to let them do it and prove to themselves and every user that the UX will suck. The best they can hope for is mediocrity.

It does make you selfish, though. You'd force people who don't want to RTO into the office because you prefer it?

>My prediction is that we might get rid of the office and replace it with the office in another form — most likely better.

You'll have to explain what you mean by "most likely better" and then make the case that your "better" is enough to draw workers to an office that a bunch of them don't want to be in for all of the reasons HN has listed.

>Research into the question of the origin of life has put atheism to bed as a serious hypothesis

This is almost too dumb to respond to, but here goes.

Atheism isn't a hypothesis and never has been. I half-suspect you mean abiogenesis, but even there you'd be dead wrong. Recent research in abiogenesis has continued to make progress and I'd be happy to provide you with some recent citations. As for atheism being "a scientifically viable stance" you sound like you're way overstating the case in the hope that people won't know the difference and will give you really unearned credence. Per Wordnik, in their third definition atheism is "the denial of theism, that is, of the doctrine that the great first cause is a supreme, intelligent, righteous person."

Put in layman's terms, that definition of atheism boils down to disbelief in stories that someone tells you about a supreme creator. Nobody is obligated to listen to or accept somebody else's words, even if they're said at high volume in over a microphone in front of a bunch of people willing to put money in a basket.

Science, on the other hand, is (basically) the "Money talks, bullshit walks" way of trying to filter out the whole host of lies, special pleading, misinformation and plain nonsense that gets bandied about under the "religion" banner.

IMO it's only a debacle for developers who don't want to learn the native platform or don't think they can do it.

I wonder if that's because Musk is really busy flushing Twitter down the toilet and isn't around to interfere as much in Tesla...

"Accidentally". Right.

I once worked at a small company in Florida where there were "offices" but the office manager would talk on speaker phone from his office at the top of his lungs all day. I had the headphones on and the only way I could drown him out was to blast music at high volume, or to take my laptop out into the hallway and hunker down, or to invent reasons why I needed to work at home so I could work without those all-day interruptions. The office manager got shirty about that, since they rented me a parking space in an old bank branch about four blocks away from the office; told me I took "a lot of liberties". I got a strong "because I said so!" vibe from that, and I bounced not too long after. Your contributions to this thread read like ChatGPT being used by Business Insider to try and prop up the corporate real estate market.

Hah. Have you met many business leaders? They could be poster models for the Dunning-Kruger effect.

And the person who established their bona fides integrating that solution wants to preserve the resulting status, so you'll hear some variation of "I don't think that will happen, but let's cross that bridge when later".

>Sadly, performance did not seem to be the primary criterion for laying people off at many companies.

That's because layoffs are meant to adjust headcount due to changing business conditions (budget, etc). If you're using performance as a criterion, the word you're looking for is "terminated for cause" or "terminated for performance".

>From experience, those announcing that a codebase is bad sounds more resume-driven than technical. It sounds like they want to make a mark more than making a functional difference.

Graybeard here (been doing development for money for 40+ years). It's one thing to say a codebase is bad because of style, aesthetics or lack of comment; it's another to try to enumerate what that means. To me, a codebase is bad when it's hard to modify and hard to unit/integration test because of the architectural decisions that were made (which boil down to it not being properly layered and modular, overusing inheritance vs composition, using inscrutable variable names, etc).

This is what "management by sociopathy" looks like.

> As someone who thinks WFH is cancerous, this sounds excellent.

Found the middle manager who's invested in commercial real estate... B-)

This sounds really bogus to me. On the one hand you pick days with few meetings so you can go hang out and have "ad hoc encounters"; on the other hand, you write and have meetings at home because they're so much easier to do at home.

"Vital missing PWA features" are really only vital for devs who don't want to do native mobile apps. For the rest of us, they're a yawn.

From the abstract:

"The clinical presentation of myopericarditis after vaccination was usually mild and temporary, with all cases fully recovering within 14 days."

And as for your example, there are two things to keep in mind:

1) "Data" is not the plural of "anecdote", so saying you don't know anyone who's been seriously affected by COVID isn't very clear. How many people do you know who have had it? How do you know they weren't seriously affected by COVID? Were they related, or were they random individuals? Sampling error is a real thing.

2) Correlation does not equal causation. One person hospitalized with a heart attack after his third shot could be due to lots of things, including random chance or a hidden heart condition that was just pushed over the edge by his body's immune response to the vaccine.

Does that mean they look equally good or equally bad?

I'd say it's the inherent foolishness of spending time and $$$ trying to get your web UI into the uncanny valley of looking "as close as possible to the native UI" instead of spending that time and $$$ actually using the native UI and components, but that's just me.

>Yes, there is Vendor-lock in, you can't deny that. I don't know what you mean with "user-hostile" and "developer hostile".

IMO it's only "developer hostile" for developers who don't want to have to learn a new OS and languages. This sounds like someone with years of Angular experience who doesn't want to learn React because it'll make all the tricks they've learned getting Angular to behave obsolete. As far as being "user hostile" I've got no idea why that's in there... unless they're just throwing things against the wall to see if they stick, and if that's their intent they picked the wrong forum to do it in.

This is the same B.S. definition-stretching that you see in a bunch of React Native posts.

Maybe they're able to do this because Musk is busy cratering Twitter and isn't around to get in the way?

"I have never been able to kill stupid things before they cause damage". Every developer who had to postpone needed refactoring to spend time building someone's pet feature that eventually got <1% use can relate.

"Commercial real estate is going to take a massive hit the next 3-4 years and that $435B number is a real estimate in the decline in commercial real-estate value."

That doesn't really hurt my feelings that much, outside of the 401(k) and IRA holders who will lose a lot of retirement money. Hopefully the plan admins and financial people involved in those plans will start dumping commercial real estate in favor of something with more legs before that 3-4 years is up.

It pretty much is. See https://devhumor.com/content/uploads/images/April2016/how-de....

It depends. Senior-level people are likely fine, judging by the number of LinkedIn hits I get every week.

>... in general we don’t design building codes with costs in mind and I feel that’s a pretty large recipe for disaster.

Speaking as a Floridian living in Tampa (who just had a near miss with a Cat 4 hurricane) that is an extraordinarily poor choice of words. Building codes aren't supposed to be designed with costs front and center; they're supposed to be designed to foster a sturdy structure than can withstand most likely actual disasters. Go look at the footage of Ft Myers Beach and Sanibel Island for some perspective.