I've ran through most of the intro doc, but I'm still not sure if Exponent supports invoking platform/system APIs? E.g. if I want to access clipboard contents, or wifi network configuration, etc, how can it be done with Exponent? With React Native, I can write corresponding functionalities using Java or Swift/ObjC, and then integrate it with the RN main app, but how can this be done with Exponent?
IMO, Capital and Talents are the two major factors in determining whether or not a location has a potential to have a good and sustainable tech scene. You'd have to have good supply and demand for both to sustain a healthy tech scene, and the driving factor between the two is capital, not talents. The exodus of talents in SD is a symptom of weak local demand (not because of, say, not enough restaurant options); which in itself is a symptom of weak supply of capital. Any place's scale of tech scene reaches to a local equilibrium when the supply and demand for both factors levels up. Following that logic, San Diego seems to be going where that local equilibrium is, given the current scale of capital available in the region. But the fact that more VCs are looking at places outside of the bay may bring some hope to SD, depending on whether or not SD will be "the chosen city".
Definitely a good point, and a puzzling one as well. A follow up question to think about would be: what's the reason for those overhead/administrative cost/monopolies, etc? And more intriguingly, what if there were no "Made In China", would have everything's price gone up like in healthcare/education?
It looks to me whether or not a "stuff" can be "Made In China" is a strong indicator of whether it's becoming more expensive or affordable. Basically if it can be "Made In China" it'll be cheaper, otherwise it'll go the other direction. "Made In China" is used loosely here referring to anything that can be outsourced anywhere else, not limited to China.
This seems to be built on top of WebRTC, using data channels ? I believe at least Safari doesn't support that, but their github readme does seem to imply support on Safari. Also, since it's based on WebRTC, who's responsible for setting up the STUN/TURN server?
His package (base salary + bonus + average vested stock each year) seems to be standard with regard to the position he's applying. Still, with that package, if Seattle's cost of living is the show stopper (not cheap by any means), then I guess never bother trying at Google/Facebook/equivalents in the Bay Area...
I'm no international law lawyer, and didn't really look too much into the details of the "ruling", which I think, as any law, would be pointless unless there's enforcement (by whom?). It just baffles me that an article about the "history" of something didn't mention one of the first questions regarding the history of anything: where does it come from? It's not that hard to look up, it's right there in the first sentence on wikipedia....
What's ironic about this article of "History of Nine-Dash Line", is that it mentioned ROC (Republic Of China) 0 times, and only mentioned Taiwan twice (in either cases related to the actual history). The fact is that the original Eleven-Dash Line/Nine-Dash Line was established by ROC (now Taiwan) who still holds the claim, and is furious about the recent "ruling". I guess nobody gives an F what Taiwan thinks in this matter is probably because... well who cares about Taiwan, when we are talking about the Big Bad China, right? Sarcasm aside, if you want to talk about history, at least get the actual history part right: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nine-dash_line
Yes, WebVR is more performant (many webpages struggle to achieve even 60fps). But minimum 90fps, at a much higher resolution is a challenge even running on bare metal right now. And that is needed for even the simplest VR experience (unless you don't move your head that much, but then what's the point of VR).
Totally agree on the potential damage Cardboard/Gear can do to VR. I had a friend who tried Cardboard he bought for $20, and his comment was "it really was just worth $20, or less".
It's great that Vive has gained such traction (I personally contributed to that number), but I don't think VR has "hit it" yet. I think what Vive offers today is a good indicator of what would become the norm in VR in the next few years (assuming big companies keep pouring money in), when mass production of low cost equipment that provides experience similar to what Vive can do today. Low cost device + pretty good (but may not be the top notch) experience is what's needed for VR to really take off. Cardboard is trying to do that right now, but honestly it lacks a lot on the "pretty good experience" part.
I really like aframe, but I just has the feeling that for things like aframe, it would be similar to what the Web Apps has been experiencing: the performance will always a few steps behind the native alternative. Even for Vive/Rift, there's still vast space for improvement on the hardware/performance side, so I'd assume a long way before efforts like aframe.io to really take off.
Interestingly enough that just yesterday I read that the famous "ego depletion" theory backed by tons of serious research might got debunked. And today, "the research is clear" that we should ban elementary homework. I just can't help but think how "clear" the research actually is....
It might be a thing in China, but I don't think it's the case in this particular incident. It's very unlikely that Chinese government officials would come up with a name for a government project with intentional ties to a Hollywood blockbuster, which was never officially released in China. The name is very likely derived from the said Chinese idiom. But the translator might take a little bit freedom here: instead of translating into "Sky Net" with two words, "Skynet" is so much more catchier for an English reading audience :)
FWIW, "Sky Net" in Chinese actually has a meaning, it's from a Chinese idiom, 天网恢恢，疏而不漏, roughly translated, literally, as "Heaven(Sky)'s Net(of justice) is wide, it may have large meshes, but lets nothing through/misses nothing", referring to situations where "heavenly justice - as referred to by "Sky Net" - will eventually come, and captures/punishes the "bad guys".
Definitely Xamarin is geared towards the .NET ecosystem, at least for now. But .NET aside, as a cross-platform "platform", how does Xamarin compare with React Native? Anybody has experience in both of them?
What you said is true, but Samsung and Apple do have frictions, and I believe both of them do have contingency plans that hedge against the risk of a full out war between them. What amazes me is Netflix's seemingly "un-conditional trust" on Amazon, it seems putting them in a potentially very vulnerable position, even without considering Amazon Video being a potential competitor. Maybe they just don't have any other choice right now.
Agree, switching is so costly, and IMHO given Netflix's current profit margin, which is not that high, I doubt they can afford to replace aws with a full in-house solution.
Aws and Amazon Instant Video probably are very separate businesses. And right now, aws is obviously much more successful than Amazon Video. But is that enough reason for Netlfix to be not scared of being a full aws shop and not worrying the fact that their biggest - probably the only - competitor (Amazon Video) also shares the same parent company as Netflix's main tech provider (aws)?
FWIW, reading the comments reminds me of Hilary Clinton's answer to "Is Obamacare helping or hurting the average U.S. citizen?" on Quora (https://www.quora.com/Is-Obamacare-helping-or-hurting-the-av...) The comments on Hilary's response seem resonate the comments here...
I'm not a java programmer (my knee jerk reaction to quickly bang out an MVP would mostly be python), but this negative attitude towards Java seems unfair. There's a lot more to the Java universe than just enterprise Java. There are companies using Java that do cool stuff at large scale, and very reliable. Netflix is heavily Java, and nobody would (at least I wouldn't) argue that their tech is dull. Even if you are looking for pure hip factor, there's things like vert.x, and all these other JVM languages, which are not Java per se, but one of the selling points of those languages is it can utilize tons of libraries in the java ecosystem if needed. The last argument against java would be its verbosity and productivity (lack of), but I'd argue Java has one of the best IDE support among all languages, which helps alleviate the problem significantly.
Good to know. Then the "reactive" mentioned in the title is not exactly async, and not exactly as in "Reactive Extensions" either, so where can I find the intended meaning of "reactive" in that context?
ah, thanks for the explanation... I guess we probably need a "new_cool_term" namespace for every new/re-purposed term. Simply use "reactive" to refer to "async" already caused a name collision for me here....
Vert.x indeed looks pretty cool. But I found it a little bit weird that they used the term "reactive" in the title, but I'm not sure what the "reactive" is referring to: maybe Reactive Extensions, or at least RxJava? which should be perfect with vert.x to solve the callback hell problem. Or they just use it as a generic term for async technology used in vert.x/node.js/tornado etc?
Technologically it's not a walled garden, but "business wise" - for lack of a better word- it is definitely a way to improve content consumption experience on Facebook, not for the general Internet at large.
Interesting to see how different companies address the "mobile web sucks" problem.
Google is coming from the top, pushing for "the right way to do mobile web" for the entire Internet, while Facebook is building its own walled garden of Instant Articles. Both of these strategies require the content provider to adopt yet another "standard", which takes time and money to make happen. IMOH, any of these tech company driven "push-for-a-certain-tech" is less likely to work, or at least not cost effective.
In contrast, the transition to "mobile web first" is already done in China, which I would argue has the largest monetizable mobile consumer market in the world (because it's not only for hip young people. Most if not all of the grandma generation in China are getting on the internet for the 1st time, and only through WeChat on smartphones). Any user of the WeChat app knows the astonishing volume of contents shared within that social app, and all of them are mobile centric, actually it's fair to say it's "mobile only" (if you load the same URL of a shared article in WeChat on a desktop browser it'll look aweful i.e. they are not responsive, and they don't care). Yet, this transition happened not because of WeChat pushed all content providers to adopt a certain standard, but done spontaneously by each content provider, on their own to figure out what looks good on WeChat. The need to make "mobile only" content comes from the desire to reach the huge user base in WeChat, which, unlike facebook, is a "mobile only" app.
The tech for making mobile friendly webpages are there for years. I would argue the reason it's not happening in the US is because of weak demand, not supply. If you have the sort of "mobile only" demand as seen in WeChat (Facebook is better positioned in that regard than Google), you'd see content providers switch to whatever suits them overnight.