runT1ME

Why does someone want this functionality? Do you expect, say, Oracle to work this way? I honestly don't see this as a useful feature in a database that's operating at scale, but I'm open to hearing reasons for needing this.

From what I can tell, AirBnB has a brand and a web application. Technically, I can't imagine the latter is more complicated than the average e-commerce site delivered at scale. I am having trouble understanding how big data can create an advantage (maybe to help owners price their rentals?). If a competitor pops up, there's no reason owners can't list on multiple sites without facing any penalties.

AirBnB is not a company I'd invest in for the long term, while I would invest in Uber/Lyft. So, what am I missing?

Health care is also free for most tech workers or if not free, a blip on the radar. I think I pay $40 a month for amazing healthcare (and I'm in SoCal not in the Bay).

I spent three years on the 2nd largest Scala 'team' in the U.S (first as an engineer, then leading a sub team), the problem is that using Scala as a 'better java' doesn't really buy you much productivity wise. A small percentage of sub teams tried using Scala this way and hit a lot of road blocks with the unfamiliar syntax, immature tooling, and other quirks.

The teams that had huge productivity gains were the ones who leaned heavily on the functional features WHILE caring about overall readability. That means yes, we used Scalaz but we discouraged the omission of dots and parentheses (as you mentioned), discouraged operator overloading/symbolic methods, and were very deliberate about when to reach for features such as HKTs or some of the more unfamiliar features of Scalaz.

Overall it lead to a very productive and fun development experience, and at the same time illuminated many ways in which the Scala ecosystem could also be improved.

At Verizon I worked in projects that were pure FP/heavy Scalaz, as well as working in scala projects that were basically java++.

Both of them were projects I had architectural input on, but depending on the teams comfort level, we decided upon what style of Scala would be used.

The language is deeper than some others, and while a java programmer might be able to pick up python in a few days and vice versa, there's definitely going to be more of a learning curve to pick up 'FP style Scala'. However, we had people who had no prior Scala experience come in and dive in successfully to even our most hardcore FP projects. As long as you are OK with a bit of ramp up, the disparity between various styles of Scala are a bit exaggerated in my experience.

If you could spend a month fixing/refactoring/changing any component of the system, what would it be?

What % of time is spent on planning/estimating/ vs. implementing, is this the right ratio for the team?

1. Many engineers do not work on core products. Many of these companies operate like quasi accelerators at times: hire smart engineers since you can afford it, hire a few good PMs, see what happens, then market the most promising results. Twitter had Vine, Snap had Spectacles, and maybe one of the best examples of this is Amazon. They didn't need thousands of engineers to run an e-commerce site, but they did need them to build out a cloud, and Alexa, and a video streaming service, etc. Other companies want to replicate this model.

2. Scale is hard. As soon as you hit a limit of what off the shelf software or current open source offerings can do, you have a hard problem on your hands. There are certainly more 'web scale' products that exist now to make this process easier for startups, but it can still happen. It's also possible that even if there are products that can scale, it would end up being cheaper to spin up a large team of good engineers to replicate a commercial offering if you're optimistic about the companies growth.

Can you expound on this? Just because the type classes defined in Haskell can't represent a wider range of categorical structures they purport to capture, does not mean that more structure doesn't exist throughout a Haskell code base. For instance, many argue that the only type of functors used in Haskell are endofunctors, but thats not really true unless we have a narrow definition of 'functors used in haskell', no?

no, we have crafted something called CPI, that charts how much consumer goods cost, and tracked below the target for that. Meanwhile, coastal RE, equities, business valuations and skyrocketed at unprecedented rates...

^ Fantastic conference btw. Very beginner friendly, welcoming, and intelligent speakers and attendees. Talks are all rated by general background knowledge needed, and an unparalleled 'hallway track'.

I'm going to argue for any large scale project, the answer will be no.

Lots of Scala shops stick to that style of Scala.

I cannot imagine designing a system for production use where anyone is OK with a single point of failure being a single instance of a machine. I mean if we're playing hypothetical games you don't need a distributed system either, just get one giant instance and put everything on it.

Operation based CRDTs do seem more limiting compared to State Based though, so you're at the mercy of your data structure being able to be represented as a CRDT.

Static typing can prevent errors in business logic.

>various memory leak problems - locking issues - race conditions

All are bugs that static typing has had tremendous success in preventing. Have you any experience in a HM like type system?

There have always been 'blue collar' engineering jobs. When I started in the tech industry I was making $13 an hour writing HTML and a bit of SQL here and there.

There are probably tens of thousands of "Software Engineers" putting together PHP sites, doing front end JS work at an entry level, hacking together some minor software customizations. I think you're right, this will become more prevalent. The world needs a lot more engineers to do this kind of work.

>There is a disinterest among business to pay higher, and higher salaries.

Evidence points to the contrary, salaries have skyrocketed in the last ten years... have you been paying attention?