There are certain things in life that are meant to be unstructured and spontaneous. The moment you try to sandbox them they tend to devolve into noise which then calls for more structure or "rules", it's a slippery slope. If you're remote, you can always start a huddle and talk while you work, or if talking is not your thing, a good old DM can work. If you're worried about noise or things getting lost, you can always move the work related things into their own channel as they come up. Just 2 cents.
The food industry is due for a good old opensource disruption, where each restaurant can setup their private menu hub (like you would an instagram account), add their payment processing details, and start delivering their own orders. It's a win-win for the restaurant and their recurring customers.
Yes, another case of old school web dev making a comeback. “HTML over the wire” is basically server-rendered templates (php, erb, ejs, jinja), sent asynchronously as structured data and interpreted by React to render the component tree.
What’s being done here isn’t entirely new. Turbo/Hotwire [1], Phoenix LiveView, even Facebook’s old Async XHP explored similar patterns. The twist is using JSX to define the component tree server-side and send it as JSON, so the view model logic and UI live in the same place. Feels new, but super familiar, even going back to CGI days.
I don't know you, but it sounds like you have principles you stand for and that's rare. If you have a talent for something that can do good in the world it's worth pursuing. I'd take a break and find a place that aligns with your values. Best of luck.
I appreciate the no-build-step approach. It’s refreshing to see a return to simplicity, even if it feels cyclical—similar libraries have come and gone, but that’s how the web evolves. As browsers continue to improve and embrace web standards, it makes sense to lean into tools that trend toward minimalism and simplicity. Great job!
FizzBuzz trips people up for all kinds of reasons: fear of ‘gotcha’ questions, nerves, overthinking, or even feeling insulted by how basic it is. Sure, some fail because they can’t program—but passing doesn’t mean much either. It just means they’re good at FizzBuzz, not necessarily at solving real problems.
That’s fair, but most software jobs aren’t at top-tier companies. HR often stays out of the process due to technical barriers, leaving engineers to handle interviews. Leetcode becomes the easiest way to offload the hassle—ironically, a self-inflicted wound on fellow engineers.
This is a mix of laziness and convenience. Hiring often boils down to what’s easiest, not what’s best. Leetcode is a proxy: it quickly filters candidates and spares everyone from more effort. But if you hire based on Leetcode, you’ll get Leetcode engineers. If you hire based on track record, impact, and real-world projects, you’ll likely get someone who’s better—and actually fits the role.
If you want to do your part and can afford it, turn down any Leetcode based interviews and let them know why if they ask.