Don't worry, you will grow out of it (thats not patronizing, just an observation on both me and many around me over decades). Life is complex, way more complex than you think it is and often a least-bad solution is used and stays around.
All you have to keep remembering is that whatever solution to the problem is, it has to work reliably long term on its own on real lazy and greedy folks out there, not some handwavy wishful statements without much substance and utterly unrealistic expectations.
Capitalism is fine. You just need to add a bit of inescapable wealth tax or similar solid mechanism. Which is unrealistic in US, hence the inevitable direction its heading towards.
Show me 1 single truly good honest person who managed to get through all the crap of local and state politics to get into party and get elected... if you think you know some, you just don't know them well enough.
There are no nice people in politics anywhere near real power, just broken, messed up, sociopaths and so on. Why do you think these folks would do anyhow better than rich when deciding common good? Also, every successful politician has somebody powerful and rich behind them who groomed them into position they have now, its not like they get elected and decide/vote from that point on based on their own moral values, thats not how real life looks like.
What do you mean, there are systems out there which effectively deal with any and all complaints common folks have against the rich, ie Switzerland and its wealth tax. Not too much to force everybody to avoid it, not too little to not matter when big sums come into play. Now why this well known approach haven't been implemented in your own country is a question for your own politicians and their donors.
Yet rich still come here to live or retire, despite lacking any serious personal tax-haven lure (in some places in some cases taxes are lower than average here, but for real tax havens just within Europe see Channel islands, Luxembourg, Malta, Cyprus, Netherland etc plus everything gets reported back to home countries in case of EU or US).
Have you actually every talked about code and architecture to another peer? If levels are cca same it quickly becomes an effortless exercise where ideas flow quickly and topics are immediately picked up. Lets call it brainstorming.
Why can't we repeat that in interview? I don't care if some dev can code some method names or detailed algorithms from his head, when it takes 3 seconds to find exact solution. In other words, there is little real added value from such a skill. You get much better peek into somebody's head with above - but it requires significantly more effort on interviewee's side, heck maybe even some preparation.
You can to certain extent hack leetcode process by just doing leetcode. Its much harder to be verbally fluent about designs, concepts and libraries that you never used. And for the rest, there is a trial period, you can't skip that 3 months experience and cram it into interviews.
You sir go wherever you want but please leave Java to professionals that make companies just work (TM). Yes its not ultra fashionate with all new features in some other languages (but improving constantly), but TBH I don't care, at all, I can work till retirement with Java 8 and be very happy, at the end its just a tool to solve problems and darn good one.
Proper quality engineering is delivering good robust solutions to companies, and Java is great for that in many many aspects, moreso than most other platforms. And who steers it, that's a question I couldn't care less about, just keep it working as expected, completely cross-compatible across all platforms and all previous version (looking at ya Microsoft, that clusterfuck with 'MS Visual C++ redistributable' requiring 20+ sometimes conflicting installations, often ending up in games not working at all even if required version is present - that's just bad engineering, they don't even have solid internal registry to prevent these FUBARs requiring full clean reinstall of Windows).
I wouldn't shake my hand with some of the best in the world. Why so damning? Heck we didn't even define in what they are best in, could be contract killing or lying for example (not applying to the actual topic and person, just generic statements).
More to the point, some people are natural leaders, they can process many stressful complex situations in parallel without breaking a sweat. I know I can't, not long term, all the kudos to them.
At least some of them are also amoral a-holes, highly functioning sociopaths (these get more common the more power and money floats around till they become the norm).
To keep things polite - I couldn't give a nanofraction of a fuck what kind of app you want to build, I am not giving my biometric data on such a stupid whim to anybody, not to US for-profit, when US laws selectively considers remaining 95% of humans on Earth subpar.
Interesting viewpoint, lie is a lie and amoral is amoral. We can wrap it in nice package or act like 'it had to be done because others are doing it', and it may be a correct statement. But its still a plain in-your-face lie.
If that telco would know truth they would most probably cut them out, not due to their size but due to their lies. This is not how trust is built, this is how you lose it very quickly and for good.
Maybe we need to accept that this is expected from all startup owners/ceos. Fine with me too, but its still amoral. We define our own legacy, if we ever care (and these mega egos do care a lot).
I don't think its necessary to prove anything he says, the keyword is 'could'. We don't know, and people who actually do don't spill it on HN just because we would like them to.
These are generic statements about cult-like leaders, Musk is a prime example. Its hard won affection, not just smooth BS, we here all know that.
That being said, people generally don't change, just situations (barring some catastrophic accidents or similar). Whatever actions given person did in the past describe them well enough in present. Again, generic but IMHO always valid so far.
some people wear them, most of them clueless I-wear-it-too crowd. I see a lot of people around me / commuting wearing Garmin watches (ie fenix 7 pro), now that's a conversation starter.
Its nothing new either, luxury brands (eyewear, purses, cars, whatever) have discovered this decades if not century ago, why do you think people actually buy say Versace suits?
And I disagree HN crowd 'looked through' this, the amount of tribalism and emotional irrationality that almost any Apple-related topic here brings is probably unparalleled.
Sure, but also sometimes you waste your life working thinking you kick ass left and right, till you arrive at certain point, ie retirement and realize you actually wasted your life, and no amount of money can change that. Sure, you have a some freedom ahead of you, but only as much as your health, finances and other circumstances allow you to, and this is usually less than people project earlier.
Plus family happens now for many of us, and not later. Kids need their parents, not their money. Its a grave mistake that hurts badly your closest ones for life to prioritize excellence in 1 direction over everything else, especially them.
I'll always have endless amount of respect of people raising their kids properly themselves into mature, happy adults who know what they want in life and go for it, even if it means they just worked to live. I don't have even a cubic picometer of respect for folks who end up doing the opposite, regardless of what they achieved professionally. This world needs new generation of balanced adults much much more than some search optimized by 0.1% or some marginally improved social graph monetization.
Of course not everybody wants, needs or can create a family, that's fine but another topic, then I agree with you more.
Agree 100%, most folks I know have Apple watches to appear sportive, because its such a cool crowd to be in currently. The guys actually doing some proper trainings almost never have them, including me. There is also category of pros/semi-pros/hardcore amateurs where it actually makes sense to use some form of it(but I never saw pros training ie in Chamonix to wear Apple brand for that, and those folks all have chest straps), by measuring any small deviations, progress etc.
For me, it actually distracts me from workouts and activities. I used my wife's Fenix 6 pro twice for running to get the idea how long my usual trail run in the forest is, and how much elevation I gain/lose. What I estimated from my feeling was anyway 95% correct (although I don't think watches measure small variations of natural terrain very precisely). But it was distracting, looking at heartbeat you subconsciously want to push/keep yourself in some perf bracket (ie just below or above anaerobic threshold for me). Vibration after each km (probably can be turned off though).
After that measurement, running again without them was so liberating, and had this nice feeling of extra freedom in the nature, just me and the trail. I feel very well when I cross anaerobic threshold, perform above it or being close to it, don't need gizmo to tell me so.
They are not (yet), but target group doesn't care about raw stats, or price/performance ratios. But I love them, because they will push Garmin making even better watches, so everybody wins.
Yeah that comment is desperately out of touch with reality. I presume the person never actually met/dealt with these folks, for them it would be humiliating to wear it and to be seen wearing it, Apple badge or not doesn't matter. For those levels, carrying >100k watches and having plastic ski goggles on your head? Forget it, anywhere where others can see them. Maybe this mindset changes in decade or two, but not earlier.
Generally on the topic, its rather underwhelming release of device that is searching for its market (while usual Apple echo chamber here on HN sees it as second coming of Jesus). No wonder they scrapped the release few times in the past, it must have been properly underwhelming when compared to competition. And pathetic 2h battery life at best? That makes it useless for any longer flight (I am sure you can plug powerbank and continue but it will look pretty bad and annoying as hell).
I am sure Apple will tune software to perfection, but I can't see it being enough, market is tiny considering the investment, well saturated and from what I heard rather shrinking. But I hope they will push the market in some good direction long term with their creative approach, so we all can benefit eventually.
Laser projection on windshield is by far the best invention in car security in past decades for me. I would make it mandatory in all new cars, much more important than over-turbocharged tiny fragile engines that have low consumption only on paper.
I literally don't lose sight of outside situation for hours. I have all the info I usually need - current speed, limit, any navigation info if I don't use google maps, selection of songs. Few buttons to control things on steering wheel is all you need.
And yes touchscreens were and are crap, didn't like first Teslas exactly due to that, while crowds were hyped how new and cool it looked, ignoring practicality and safety issues.
Can't agree more, super majority is a dangerous situation if folks laughing at democracy take helm (like it or not, Trump was a perfect definition of it within western democracies, although dictators like putin run circles with big grin around such people). 4 years is plenty to do a lot of damage if actors at power are malevolent.
The problem of using Switzerland as a yardstick is that barely any population anywhere can match up maturity and morality of them, maybe some nordics. Give a glimpse of same freedom/responsibility to otherwise mature British folks and we have brexit.
US has many fine things running for it, but politics (and healthcare, education, criminality etc) definitely ain't it and should not be taken as inspiration. The whole us-vs-them mentality that such longterm bipartisan system brings is very limiting. What if I like low taxes, while also supporting abortions and legal soft drugs? Or any other mix that would be pretty schizophrenic in US.
You realize that these photos are to be compared with other phones and not some apsc on tripod, thats a ridiculous premise for everybody understanding 101 of photography that not even Samsung during any release was claiming to beat.
It still shows you much more details than visible via eyes, so yeah its a party trick (what else would moon shot on phone be), but pretty darn great at that (I haven't seen so many people with :-O since iphone 1 release when showing this... then they quickly try their top iphones and xiaomis and end up consistently with a small white blob).
There is one aspect that this phone wins at easily - it can take that moonshot (TBH it can be a bit sharper than yours) while handheld, pretty consistently. Good luck trying that with your apsc with such a long shutter, it will consistently end up in just a blur. Software often beats raw hardware even these days.
I have a similar photo done on S22 ultra on March 6 this year, and neither look like your (position of lower right mega crater but also the rest). So its not simple 'photoshop-into-predefined-nice-image'.
I can clearly see that most folks here don't actually own discussed devices (which is fine, its US-based HN, a bastion of iphone and many Apple employees dwell here and uncritical appreciation of Apple is very evident in every single related thread). I've used its 10x zoom extensively over more than a year, it simply blows all other phones away easily for that kind of situation (more than those rather weak 3x zooms available everywhere). Family photos, wild animals, nature, anything you want to come closer, otherwise the scene is tiny dots in the center like on other phones. It works really well for what it is, with obvious unavoidable physical limits.
Overall this phone made me put my fullframe Nikon D750 away on a day I bought it. I took it 'just to be sure' on vacation to Egypt last year, didn't touch it a single time. Most often it doesn't produce strictly as good images but a) they are good enough to be viewed on phones side by side easily, basically as good as fullframe there and sometimes even much better, ie handheld photos in the night of dark scenes, fullframe is utterly lost without tripod, and b) it weights 0 and takes 0 extra space (and cost 0 instead of many thousands for modern camera with big sensor), since I have phone with me always anyway.
Tried exactly the steps as author of article, couldn't reproduce it a bit, tried various mega zooms, his various original photos, dark room etc. Blur remained blur, nothing added. I mean at this point everybody acknowledges any decent phone is painting quite a bit (ie iphone taking other side of bunny than reality, thats a fine example) and I am sure Samsung is doing their part as they have the literal android flagships.
To sum it up - good for the companies, not so good for many users. I fail to grasp why as a user I should care about increasing salaries at given company though, my priorities are elsewhere, even orthogonal since its my cash they so desperately want.
The company part - just look at how Adobe increased profits when they moved to subscription model. Many vocal users hated it since day 1, but majority goes and buys it even if they complain, even if it costs them much more long term. Why? Well if you are a photographer, you will need Lightroom or Photoshop as today as in 10 years. Nobody at Adobe cares that you would be perfectly fine with same version as purchased, not enough cash can be squeezed out like that.
As for users part, it has 2 subparts - quite a few really benefit since they get cheaply access to otherwise expensive tools (like say editing 2 videos per year in Premiere if we stay in Adobe realm). But most simply see increased TCO long term on product they are sort of 'stuck' with, in sense they have workflow and tool they are good at, fast, and understand it, possibly even paid for some plugins or similar. Very few people migrate away from Lightroom for example, competition would have to create something remarkably similar which normally is not how product strategy looks like.
At least they didn't start requiring you to move all your assets to their cloud in order to use them, that's outright slavery sold as added value. I am sure companies like Adobe would be very happy to put this in place.
So yeah, companies do it because they can, if they feel that market will accept this move and move on, and not stop using its products. Kind of semi-monopolies. I do expect Microsoft will come up with similar model for OS if it hadn't already done so.
All you have to keep remembering is that whatever solution to the problem is, it has to work reliably long term on its own on real lazy and greedy folks out there, not some handwavy wishful statements without much substance and utterly unrealistic expectations.
Capitalism is fine. You just need to add a bit of inescapable wealth tax or similar solid mechanism. Which is unrealistic in US, hence the inevitable direction its heading towards.