plumarr

Do you seriously think that ? My experience is so dissociated that I think it unbelievable. I don't remember ever seeing an ad for a small business on the web, even less discovered one through them.

I discovered most small businesses that I use through word of month, seeing them while traveling or active search through google or google maps. The ones that I may have discovered through ad where through local physical add such as any box fliers or fliers/posters in other local businesses.

> For example, in France, you can be sent to jail for up to 24h with no probable cause.

There must be a probable cause : https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F14837

For information, it's done in Belgium and there is no spiral of death : https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/inflation-of-consumer-pri...

And it was followed by a deflationist policy in the years preceding the Nazi takeover : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinrich_Br%C3%BCning#Historic...

There is two aspects to a company : - one that benefits a few private people, mainly the share holders and high level manager/executives - one that benefits the society as a whole, mainly through the company production/services and the salaries of its employes

There is an option to punish the first aspect while limiting the damage on the second one : the nationalisation of the company, with limited compasation to its shareholder. Strangely it seems to only be done or considered to save "to big to fail" business, such as bank, in time of crisis, not as a tool of law enforcement.

I was able to formaly state a "nogo" when I worked in banks. The management could bypass it, but it was then a formalized decision of their part and it discharged me of any liability for the problem that lead to my "nogo".

> This is a noble goal but unrealistic and unfair at scale. It is in the current organisation of software development because it doesn't allow that.

In the building sector you can't build without your design being signed of by an engineering office and the engineer and its office take the responsability for it, both at the criminal and civil level.

If the same rule existed for the software industry, the organisation would adapt itself around it.

That it's due to the corporate regulation has to be proven.

Being an european, I would say that the first cause is cultural. Innovation for the sack of innovation isn't particurlaly viewed as positive as in the US. In many circle it's even seen as negative. Same thing for entrepreneurship, as there is a good chunk of people that see Businesses, especialy big ones, as an ennemy.

I have used Jira at several place, and every time that it worked fine Jira was the source of thruth for the project. There was no shadow tracking beside it. So everybody updated it happily and used it.

You can't do that based of the code because the code is limited to its content. How do you track everything that isn't in it ? (requirements, relation with other teams, delivery to customer, customer tickets,...)

It really depends of your business. Sure if your are a SaaS company, SAP, Google,... that's the case.

But if you are a small shop that build software for other companies, it isn't. You write the software, get a one off paiement and you'll not be able to get more revenue from it in the future outside of a possible maintenance contract. You can't resale it to someone else.

To summarise, the work of many software companies is akind to the work of design office : you do R&D for someone else. The amortization will have to be done by your customer, not by you.

The main benefit of virtual threads it that they release their carrier thread when they call (non native) blocking code, so that other virtual threads can be executed by the same carrier.

I don't think that it's the case for C# task, which also appear to be an higher level construct.

You mean higher standard ? :)

That's maybe a cultural difference. For example I know of no such place in Belgium even if I'm quite well travelled in it. So it's a least really not common to have suburbs as you describes.

It can't but that's not due to the proposed solution for withers.

The cause is Records themselves. Record are immutable on purpose and you want to add a mutation constraint whish will not play nicely.

The proposed constraint will be triggered in this case :

    var r = retrieveFromDb(); (value is A)
    r = r.with(C) -> throw an exception

But this only work if B is generated by the wither. If I deconstruct the record manually and reconstruct with C manually, it'll work. So this offer no garantee that this transition will never occur.

I would even argue that this constraint can't be implemented at the level of the class, at least if the class is only a data carrier without external dependencies.