That, however, is the exact problem; most blogs are simple rehashes of the same things that have already been said. One could argue that this very article is a prime example of why someone shouldn't have (or rather, doesn't need) a blog. It isn't an attack against the quality of the writing itself, but the reality is that there's little of value because everything there has already been said countless times before.
Depends on the purpose of the blog. I maintain a blog for two reasons. One, writing about problems and their solutions as if I'm explaining them to someone else is a great way to solidify the concepts in one's mind (similar to rubber-duck debugging[1]). Two, having an active blog is a signal to potential employers that you're active in the ecosystem. Even if someone is rehashing the same old topics in their posts, seeing how they think and how well they write can be a useful indicator.
Those are both reasons why it is in your interest to write a blog. They are not reasons why someone might want to actually read your blog (short of prospective employers).
Fiction is read for the fun of reading a different take on the same basic tropes. Most programming blog posts are not read for even remotely similar reasons.
PLEASE do not put the word "remote" in your posting if you do not hire remote employees. It makes scanning for companies that do more difficult. People will assume by default that your company is only local.
Edit: As suggested below, using "on-site only" is a much more find-friendly phrase.
I'd also like to throw this out there -- I'd really like to see HN require "location" as part of official HN job postings.
Very few post where they are located, and then I have to go to the company website, and sometimes even the website doesn't tell me where they are, and I end up searching for them on Google maps!
Unfortunately this is not true. As someone who posts in here every month I get about 5-10 emails from remotes each month if I don't put that in. Sorry.
Thanks for sharing vague thoughts about work other people should do. Without some discipline or structure in the listings, there's no easy way to determine if the post is saying the R-word is allowed or that it's not; there are a a huge number of variations in how the idea is expressed.
Professionally: C#, Xamarin/Xamarin Forms (iOS/Android), Ruby, Ruby on Rails, JavaScript, Scala
Hobby/Exposure: Go, Erlang/Elixir, C, Rust, Java
Resume: Please email me for my resume.
Email: orteipid@icloud.com
About: I'm a developer presently living in Philadelphia but relocating to Detroit in the near future. I'm currently happy with where I am and what I'm doing but always open to a change if the role and offer are right. I presently work on mobile application development using Xamarin and C#, with a background in developing web applications using Ruby/Rails and Scala/Scalatra. In future roles I would prefer to stick to application development or the backend, but I'm also interested in learning more about large datasets as well as machine learning, both of which I have not been involved with.
A flexible schedule is very desirable. I am okay working with teams based both in the US as well as overseas. I have a year's worth of experience working remotely, and given my present situation in life this would more than likely be mandatory, with periodic travel to the main office certainly being possible. Please email me if you would like to speak further.
Technologies: Ruby, Rails and related tooling. Some experience with Scala.
I am presently looking for new employment as my most recent company laid off all of its remaining employees after becoming insolvent. Given my future situation in terms of next year, I am unable to relocate right now and would strongly prefer remote work.
In my most recent role I worked on the development of a sports statistics API using a combination of Rails for parsing (storing to MongoDB) and Scala for the API with Swagger generating a frontend. I have worked in the past with Rails in a consultancy context. For better or worse I have typically worked on CRUD applications with primarily static content, but am looking for new challenges where I am not necessarily just working on such applications. I have an interest in becoming at least somewhat familiar with various languages, and would be particularly open to roles where I am not using Ruby. Such languages could include any of C#, Java, Scala, Go, or perhaps something else entirely.
Title color agreement aside, I feel the login form contrasts too much with the orange (and the blue forgotten password link is out of nowhere, as well). I can see why the designer would try to stick that general hue, but the reason that the use of the color currently works as it stands is because the top bar is very thin and provides the obvious functionality that it needs to. It isn't their fault though necessarily as orange is a tough color to work with.
Beyond that, the larger text for titles is nice if only as it makes scanning through them easier. Simply darkening them to a black or near-black would make for a large improvement alone.
I've used Scala on and off professionally for about 4-5 months and the best advice I could ever give to someone using it for the first time is to try and treat it like Ruby but with type safety.
As numerous people before me have said, the language is a mess. Although it offers some benefits, the syntax is so absolutely bloated that you're probably better off taking the time to really consider whether or not you absolutely need it for all of the headaches and unreadability you're going to run into in terms of code. There aren't many Scala developers out there and the learning curve can and likely will punish you when things need to get done, assuming you're bringing in new developers.
The open source libraries all generally seem to have glacially slow development processes, which in some cases might be considered acceptable, but when the main Scala team pushes out 2.11.x (and to some degree actively encourages its use) and X framework you're using literally cannot run because library Y is not compiled against it, you end up stuck on Scala 2.9/2.10 which is really unpleasant for you because you're missing out on the speed increases and other quality of life improvements (how many times have you run into the 22 argument limit for case classes on 2.10?).
Perhaps I'm asking for too much, but Scala strikes me as a language that's supposed to be moving a bit faster than Java in terms of development, but that doesn't really seem to be the case. All in all, while it has some neat parts, if I never got to work with it again I wouldn't be crying about it.
For Haskell at least, the GHC runtime is getting pretty good, and seems to have at least basic tools for GC analysis etc. I'm ignorant of MLs so perhaps someone can speak to their status.
Of course there's the much-touted "Java Ecosystem" but it's looking crustier than ever methinks. Maven?? Blech! Also, it doesn't seem wise anymore to build a website on Servlets/JSP/SpringMVC etc, esp. if you want to attract devs. Rest APIs maybe.
What's the killer feature these days recommending the JVM?
Do the Oracle or OpenJDK JVMs deal well with heaps that large? I have no interest in other JVMs because my employer would not consider switching and I can't say I blame them.
It depends on what you mean by "deal well with heaps that large". You can certainly set them that large with no problems. But given your memory patterns they can cause dramatically bad GC times.
I have so many angry thoughts running in my head, but I can only sum them up by saying that the author very clearly has a hole somewhere in his life that he needs to fill by projecting his narrow viewpoint on others, and that subsequently this blog post is one of the dumbest things I've ever read.
I don't particularly understand the point of this. There's absolutely nothing hard to distinguish about a score on the television, especially when soccer is a low-scoring game which isn't all that hard to keep track of if you're remotely paying any attention, and channels like Univision have incredibly minimalistic, easy to distinguish graphics. I don't know what Sky is doing, but ESPN and Univision are pretty straightforward.
All I get out of this is some people trying to Web 3.0-ify something that doesn't need to be. The clock looks absolutely dreadful and sticking minutes on top of seconds is an unnatural approach to displaying time in the context of a sport.
I agree. I bet the OP wasn't expecting comments like yours, just praise, but he/she is wrong. This is totally unnecessary, and is an elegant solution to an nonexistent problem.
I think both this, the parent comment, and a fair amount of other comments on this post are unnecessarily harsh towards the designers. Pointing out design issues is always helpful for improvement and reiteration, but attacking their motivations just makes everyone hostile and gets nothing accomplished.
It appears that the hostility stems from a deep misunderstanding of football, the current UX and why it evolved the way it has.
You can hardly blame the community for reacting harshly when presented with a product they never asked for claiming that their current experience is somehow broken when it is not.
I am a software developer living in Philadelphia. I primarily work with Ruby/Rails but am familiar in varying degrees with other languages and technologies. I am open to working on any number of projects on a freelance basis. Due to my present employment, I am able to dedicate approximately 15-20 hours a week to any given project but may be negotiable based on other factors.
Languages: Ruby, Elixir, Objective-C, JavaScript, Python, R
Development Methodologies: Agile (stories via Pivotal Tracker), TDD, integration testing
