The only reason they wouldn't sell a drawer with a box joint today is because they wouldn't be able make the box flat enough. They certainly use even more complex joints even today.
The two last companies I worked for have switched from Slack to Teams. I just assumed that they had some package deal for Microsoft Office that included Teams anyway.
These have been quite big developer heavy companies. If companies like these don't think they can motivate the cost for Slack, I wonder if there are any than can.
True, at least in Sweden the Basic subscription with Teams is 66 SEK vs without which is 54 SEK. So that's ~12 SEK, while a Slack Pro user is about 90 SEK.
I just calculated that I’m about 6.24 nanolightseconds. A nanolightsecond is just over a foot, so at least Americans should easily get use to the unit.
Waterfall is a caricature straw man process where you can never ever go back to the drawing board and change the requirements or specifications. The defining characteristic is the part where design up front, you can never go back and really really have to do everything in strict order for the whole of the project.
Just having requirements and a specification isn't necessarily waterfall. Almost all agile processes at least have requirements, the more formal ones also do have specifications. You just do it more than once in a project, like once per sprint, story or whatever.
Waterfall certainly has processes for going back and adjusting previous steps after learning things later in the process. The design was updated if something didn’t work out during implementation, and of course implementation was changed after errors was found during testing.
Now that agile practitioners have learned that requirements and upfront design actually is helpful, the only difference seems to be that the loops are tighter. That might not have been possible earlier without proper version control, without automated tests, and the software being delivered on solid media. A tight feedback loop is harder when someone has to travel to your customer and sit down at their machines to do any updates.
Children are naturally interested in sweets! You don't need to make them forbidden for that. And just you are allowed to eat sweets only one day of the week doesn't mean that they are allowed to unlimited amounts of it, and, in my experience, interested to overeat it.
Why would it foster an unhealthy relationship with food to learn that some things are unhealthy and eaten only at special occasions? An unhealthy relationship with food would rather be to think that you can eat sweets whenever you feel for it.
I guess that's why American kids never eat junk food or drink soda instead of water. I'm sure the 35% of the US population that are obese will get tired of eating badly any day now.
Not at all. My wife and I, living in Sweden, are practicing it today with our kids (5 and 8 years old), and my impression is that most families around us do the same.
Energy drinks, vapes and snus might be popular among teenagers, but has there ever been a time when you have been able to control what teenagers do to any higher degree.
A bit of longtermism wouldn’t be so bad. We could sacrifice the convenience of burning fossil fuels today for our descendants to have an inhabitable planet.
But that's the great thing about Longtermism. As long as a catastrophe is not going to lead to human extinction or otherwise specifically prevent the Singularity, it's not an X-Risk that you need to be concerned about. So AI alignment is an X-Risk we need to work on, but global warming isn't, so we can keep burning as much fossil fuel as we want. In fact, we need to burn more of them in order to produce the Singularity. The misery of a few billion present/near-future people doesn't matter compared to the happiness of sextillions of future post-humans.
