> The branch will NOT be a history of how it was actually programmed.
I'm not sure how to reconcile it with the idea of having a branch for each feature. In my head, developing a feature on a branch creates a history of how the feature was programmed. Could you elaborate on that?
In that case how to refactor a class that has 20 private methods? Moving them to another class and making them public would just shift the problem, not solve it
It's impossible to give a generic answer to this, it always depends on the specific domain. But I found that in these cases, there's always a design problem somewhere. Some responsibilities aren't clear, very often not much thought has been put into the design, and most of the time you can't give an immediate answer, which is why a bad design is chosen and causes a lot of damage down the line.
Exactly, I feel like the problem is that these days we no longer actually play Age of Empires (which, again, would be fine), we share this time between playing Age of Empires, looking at Instagram and checking out work emails
This is basically the difference between western and eastern philosophies. In the west we tend to view that one person/party's idea is absolutely correct. In the east it is generally viewed that the truth lies somewhere between the two ideas. This mindset can help help avoid picking sides and becoming entrenched is what has typically become a populist dichotomy between two usually flawed ideas (at least that's how I see it in the US more often than not).
I agree, it seems that in Western culture you'll be seen as indecisive unless you pick a side and stick to it. Sometimes I'm frustrated with my tendency to be on the fence on so many issues, but at the end of the day it really seems more fair than having extreme views.
I have the same thing with some issues. Like for abortion - there's really two questions at the heart of the issue but almost nobody discusses them, so I can't make firm decision. The two questions are what defines a human life and when is it acceptable to take one.
I also have frustration when I pick a middle ground or outside the box idea. For example, with the prevalence of prenups and the variety of living situations/arrangements, I see the solution to the debate over non-traditional marriage to be making marriage documents a private contract to remove the government from trampling anyone's rights. Even the LGBTQ community is not fighting for everyone's right to marry - what about incestuous (with sterilization or longterm contraception to protect genetics) marriage or polygamy.
I haven't laid out all the details as this is an example but I can see the downvotes rolling in already...
I think maybe it can be taught. Certainly it can be at least modeled. My wife had parents that do this; I think she may have learned it by example.
In my case, it may be because I'm borderline aspy. I care more about the idea than with the person (or camp/side/school) that said it. But that doesn't leave me knowing how to teach yourself to do that, since it came rather naturally to me.
I have the same feelings and I think a part of it comes from the fact that it's not exactly possible to meet with people after work (not counting Zoom/Skype/Whatsapp with friends). It's not the remote working that is depriving us of our joy of socializing - it's having to stay home after.
Absolutely. My work has been better than ever due to not being in the office and not having to do a horrible commute (min. 45 mins each way, usually more).
The evenings are pretty dull, though - no jam sessions or martial arts classes can run, so my hobbies are on hold.
I fully agree with you. Although office interactions play a big part in socialization, I think most of the uneasiness I feel right now is due to the fact that I can't even socialize outside of work, or with non-coworkers. Not caused by remote work per se.
What I can't wrap my head around: how is being packed with 100s of people inside of a plane a few times a year seen as more dangerous than being even more packed with even more people in the metro every day during commute? I feel like the risk of getting infected in public transport is undermined comparing to planes/hotels/restaurants.
I don't know about you, but on a plane I'm definitely closer to other passengers for longer periods of time than I am on most metro rides. It also exposes you to people from a geographically wider spread, and many of those people have likewise been exposed to people from even more different places earlier in their trip.
That really depends. Many many people live in world cities where public transport is cramped and people from all over the world come and go in a constant stream.
Oh that's right, what I meant is that probably a huge part of people traveling by plane comes from big cities where there is little to no way to avoid being squeezed with other people on a daily basis
Inter-regional spread is a major factor. Subways, busses, and taxis largely move people around within an existing interchange are -- metropolitan regions. Aircraft move them across and between continents.
In 2003, James Burke revisited his 1978 series "Connections" in a 1-hour interview session, "ReConnections". Asked to describe how he would continue the original series' ending inventions forward, for the jet airplane his answer was immediate: pandemics. Beginning about 47m30s here:
It's probably less dangerous (planes have HEPA ventilation systems, most metro systems don't).
But plane travel carries infected people long distances. There's going to be a bunch of countries insisting on 2 weeks quarantine for any new arrivals.
There are a lot of extremely common myths about how the air on airplanes is "recycled", stale, full of germs, even so far as "they lower the oxygen level to get people to sleep" and stuff like that. https://www.askthepilot.com/questionanswers/cabin-air-qualit...
>even so far as "they lower the oxygen level to get people to sleep"
Is that really a bad thing? My experience on long haul flights is that most people sleep. Some people even voluntarily take drugs so they fall asleep sooner/easier.
When businesses and stores are even partially open in transit-centric cities, what choice do people have? Even if more walk/cycle, that can involve a lot of crowding too. There's no way that people somewhere like Manhattan can maintain separation from each other indefinitely--other than moving out of the city.
If transmission on the air plane is the risk you worry about, I agree that it doesn't appear that different compared to other risks associated with going outside.
However, travel obviously takes you to a new place, where the every day risks might be much greater or at least less well known than the ones you have to accept by virtue of just staying alive where you live.
Further, you also have the risk of being stranded due to local outbreaks closing borders at some point during your trip, making the duration of the trip itself uncertain. Not many people take lightly the risk of not knowing when they can get home from their vacation.
Genuine question: Is that better or worse? I’m assuming the air gets filtered before its recirculated but can the filtering process catch respiratory droplets?
>On most aircraft, air is also circulated through hospital-grade HEPA filters, which remove 99.97 percent of bacteria, as well as the airborne particles that viruses use for transport (many regional jets lack these filters). Additionally, cabins are divided into separate ventilation sections about every seven rows of seats, which means that you share air only with those in your immediate environment and not with the guy who’s coughing up a lung ten rows back.
Why? Subways are found in larger cities, airports are everywhere. Live and work in the countryside, travel to holiday destinations and you're done. Also, just because there happens to be a subway doesn't mean you need to use it. The times I've been to Washington DC I've managed to avoid using it entirely. The place is fairly compact and lends itself to walking to where you need to go.
What do you think is the best approach to make sure one's opinion is independent without spending a massive amount of time on getting an expertise in the subject?
You can't. Independent opinion doesn't exist - you would have to validate every datum you're presented with starting from first principles, which is impossible.
Accept that most of your opinions will be informed by the opinions of others, likely directly, and your method for judging truth will instinctively be biased more towards emotion, social status and ego-preservation than than logic and fact, because humans are social animals and that's just how we're wired.
I suspect most people using those other social media sites don't feel such an urge. If anything, some people use it as their primary means of socializing, communicating and consuming media, which is unhealthy, but they do so because the medium is convenient, not because it drives them in some relentless pursuit of "likes."
It still creates the internet karma points thing, visible in the top corner.
And there is "but there are people WRONG on the internet!" effect, which means demonstrating domain knowledge and winning arguments drive their interest -- something that seems strikingly more common with knowledge workers (e.g. lawyers, programmers, professors), than, say, construction workers. People wanna feel smart, esp. in their areas of proficiency and dominance.
I'm sure someone will post the relevant XKCD any minute now...
As a guy from Poland, I feel like the only obstacle is atrocious weather in winter, which stops 95% people from riding bikes. From March to November it would work just fine though.
The Norwegians say,"There's no such thing as bad weather just bad clothing." :) But more seriously in poor weather if you don't have to pedal very much and you have a "fat tire" e-bike [1] you may find it's quite a bit more comfortable than you expect.
I was also hesitating between Valencia and Barcelona. I ended up choosing Barcelona because there would be more job opportunities for my SO who doesn't work remotely.
Valencia is much cheaper than Barcelona but doesn't have a big airport nor as many good restaurants.
As for the best and worst things, I think they're valid for both Barcelona and Valencia:
The best thing is actually a combination of many: excellent weather conditions, relatively cheap cost of life, great food, access to the beach, overall good quality of life.
The worst things are the noise (cars and people) and communication.
I'm not sure how to reconcile it with the idea of having a branch for each feature. In my head, developing a feature on a branch creates a history of how the feature was programmed. Could you elaborate on that?