that’s not relevant though… in a situation where you only need 1, you only need 1
and the statement had nothing to do with individual officers, so you can’t apply it to individual officers: the group that is US police officers frequently escalate situations… individual interactions are irrelevant to that statement
you can’t apply group behaviour to single events… it takes time to change human behaviour in a group - especially when it’s politicised behaviour … if every restaurant were serving raw patties and raw was incorrectly politicised as “healthier” and then 50% started being cooked you’d say that’s progress… it’d remain horrible, but it is indeed progress and clearly those doing better should be congratulated for somehow managing to get their shit together even a little bit
generalisations shouldn’t be applied to individuals but often hold true for groups… a non-trivial number of US police officers escalate situations if they aren’t given “respect” and compliance. that is a fact… when applied to a decent period of time, over a city full of US police officers, escalation is all but inevitable: not for any individual, but the group
that’s a good and bad thing though…
it’s easy to reference code, so it leads to tight coupling
it’s easy to reference code, so let’s pull this out into a separately testable, well-documented, reusable library
my main reason for ever using a monorepo is to separate out a bunch of shared libraries into real libraries, and still be able to have eg HMR
google does a lot of things that just aren’t realistic for the large majority of cases
before kubernetes, you couldn’t just reference borg and say “well google does it” and call it a day
i’d say it’s less that it’s inadequate, and more that it’s complex
for a small team, build a monolith and don’t worry
for a medium team, you’ll want to split your code into discreet parts (libraries shared across different parts of your codebase, services with discreet test boundaries, etc)… but you still need coordination of changes across all those things, and team members will probably be touching every part of the codebase at some point
for large teams, you want to take those discreet parts and make them fairly independent, and able to be managed separately: different languages, different deployment patterns, different test frameworks, heck even different infrastructure
a monorepo is a shit version of real, robust tooling in many categories… it’s quick to setup, and allows you a path to easily change to better tooling when it’s needed
You should really not need to do a PR across multiple repos.
different ways of treating PRs… it’s a perfectly valid strategy to say “a PR implements a specific feature”, in which case you might work in a backend, a front end, and library… of course, those PRs aren’t intrinsically linked (though they do have dependencies between them… heck i wouldn’t even say it’d be uncommon or wrong for the library to have schemas that do require changes in both the fronted and backend)
if you implement something in eg the backend, and then get retasked with something else, or the feature gets dropped then sure it’s “working” still, but to leave unused code like that would be pretty bad… backend and front end PRs tend to be fairly closely tied to each other
a monorepo does far more than i think you think it does… it’s a relatively low-infrastructure way of adding internal libraries shared across different parts of your codebase, external libraries without duplication (and ensuring versions are consistent, where required), and coordinating changes, and plenty more
can these things be achieved with build systems and deployment tooling? absolutely… but if you’re just a small team, a monorepo could be the right call
of course, once the team grows in size it’s no longer the correct option… real tooling is probably going to be faster and better in every way… but a monorepo allows you to choose when to replace different parts of the process… it emulates an environment with everything very separated
i’d say they’re pretty equivalent
a monorepo is far easier to develop a single-language, fairly monolithic (ie you need the whole application to develop any part) codebase in
(though as soon as you start adding multiple languages or it gets big enough that you need to work on parts without starting other parts of the application it starts to break down rather significantly)
but as soon as your app becomes less of a cohesive thing and more separated it becomes problematic… especially when it comes to deployments: a push to a repo doesn’t mean “deploy changes to everything” or “build everything” any more
i think the best solution (as with most things) is somewhere in the middle: perhaps several different repos, and a “monorepo” that’s mostly a bunch of subtrees or submodules… you can coordinate changes by committing to the monorepo (and changes are automatically duplicated), or just work on individual parts (tricky with pnpm since the workspace file would be in the monorepo)… but i’ve never really tried this: just had the thought for a while
new fabs is iffy… samsung chose not to scale up production because they’re betting that the AI bubble is just a bubble, and in that case any change in the short term will be bad in the long term… building a factory for DRAM takes years: let’s hope the bubble of AI enshittification doesn’t last that long
similar with energy retailers in aus
the government even plays into it by having a web tool to compare energy plans, and roughly once per year my state pays people $100 just to compare deals (and then i usually spend 5min to switch providers and save ~$500/y)
this part of the DMA only applies to “gatekeepers”, which are very large providers. the biggest barriers to being a gateway are (imo) turnover of > €7.5bn, 45m active monthly users in the EU
so what they’re saying is you should cancel your subscription and keep deal-hopping around different providers i guess!
hours doesn’t come as close to the metric that you’d like though
the purpose of travel is to get from point a to point b, so you want to measure the likelihood of death when travelling the comparable trips
hours doesn’t really work because different modes of transport complete the trip in very different times. distance however is relatively similar
this is kinda the way australia works: the government sets the cost of courses (usually about $10000-$20000AUD per semester) and then pays for them entirely, and you get a HELP debt with the government which is kinda like an interest free (though indexed so it doesn’t get cheaper with time) loan which is automatically taken out of your paycheque pre-tax and only after you start earning a certain amount… if you never earn that bottom limit, the debt disappears if you die
geopolitics is consistently hypocritical… especially when it comes to the US… we absolutely can, and should be telling everyone to stop being imperialist but in lieu of that, we can just tell russia to cut the shit
or the argument holds water and also the US has consistently been in the wrong for the same reasons
i closed reader view and scrolled just to see and wow the POPUPS and 50% of the page length being ads
WHAT
who uses the internet like this and finds it acceptable?!
buys you a little extra time to move to linux
generally people think men are evil by default, and women are good by default
i think this is a misunderstanding of the dynamic
we see this play out pretty regularly with the “not all men” arguments and the like: men getting annoyed by women being careful, and taking “you could hurt me” behaviour as some kind of insult. the statement is true: not all men are evil to women, but any man could be evil to women and thus need to be treated as though it’s possible in order to protect themselves
most things scale if you throw enough resources at them. we generally say that things don’t scale if the majority case doesn’t scale… it costs far fewer resources to scale with multiple repos that it does to scale a monorepo, thus monorepo doesn’t scale: i’d argue even the google case proves that… they’ve already sunk so much into dev tooling to make it work… it might be beneficial to the culture (in that they like engineers to work across the entire google codebase), but it’s not a decision made because it scales: scale is an impediment