I actually tried a daily slack bot instead. The team HATED it with a passion. And the amount of productivity lost on other teams to a backend engineer blocking a systems designer being blocked by a UX flow etc is insanely large. We have never missed a deadline, hit all our revenue targets, and get much. much larger features done in 2/3rds of the time of the next nearest team. Part of that is because we’ve made sure to reinforce the concept that we are a single team instead of a group of server engineers, backened engineers, frontend engineers, system designers, [removed to protect identity] designers, econ specialists, UX designers, UI artists, and QA working in their own bubble.

I mean it really depends on the team. My role is as much translator as anything else. I have:

Infrastructure/Server

Backend

Frontend

Designers (three different kinds)

Performance/Econ specialists

QA

Hearing “Oh I didn’t know that, yeah we need to sync” is a common occurrence and on a team of nearly 20 people we never take more than 15mins. We have shared deadlines, shared goals, and work on shared user stories. Having that moment in the morning to go “okay, am I blocking anyone without realising it?” or “I gotta remember to make sure design knows the spreadsheet won’t have the thing they were expecting today, it’ll be Tuesday instead” is well worth the time.

On top of that, with WFH it’s a really good way to cement the team aspect. I wouldn’t care so much if we were in the office, but all being remote means we lose the “human” behind the screen a lot.

As I said, different teams and different projects need different things, but I’d argue the reason my team is the number one performing in the entire company is, in part, due to this morning time to get that alignment.

Depends on the team. My team do daily standup and it helps. A lot. “What are you working on today and do you need any help to get it done” is a super powerful question to make sure we’re all focusing on the same priorities and sharing the knowledge we have, especially in a team of mixed disciplines.

I turned privacy.resistFingerprinting to true and now get an absolutely unique fingerprint on the tool

“We invented a new kind of calculator. It usually returns the correct value for the mathematics you asked it to evaluate! But sometimes it makes up wrong answers for reasons we don’t understand. So if it’s important to you that you know the actual answer, you should always use a second, better calculator to check our work.”

Then what is the point of this new calculator?

Fantastic comment, from the article.

You don’t have to give either money and there is the option to give both money.

You literally sent that from a FOSS platform…

I’m not flailing, I’m pointing out you are trying to rewrite history.

On top of that the other commenter didn’t “destroy” my claim nor was it “bullshit”. They added context based on an assumption I didn’t make (i.e. vaccine = cure) which led me to do more research and add context that changed the level of enthusiasm I had.

What was bullshit was you deciding it was disingenuous AND you saying I had made changes you had requested. Neither of those statements are true.

“I believe your edit came either at the same time” - you do see the irony of asserting your belief like it’s fact in a thread where I added my belief to a fact and mangled it as a result? You do see it, right?

I find it kinda funny that I admitted where I was wrong but you are literally unable to.

Anyway, just clarifying: the OTHER poster got me to edit based on their HELPFUL comments. You didn’t do anything apart from state obvious facts about FDA approval and try to take credit for being so wise and insightful

Check again.

“My original comment was a glib link to a wikipedia page. I had not done the research and have edited my comment above”

To which you replied:

“Your last sentence here would change the sentiment of your original comment in a positive way. I encourage an edit.”

I was going to reply with “what, I should edit my comment again to say I have edited my comment” but decided it wasn’t as funny typed as in my head.

Sorry, mate, you are wrong. But over the most stupidly ridiculously small thing on the internet (and that’s saying something)

I just want us to be clear: your satisfaction/demands mean literally nothing to me so please don’t take credit for the other poster helping me do my research 🤷‍♂️

Nope, I had already. Hence why I said “I have edited my comment” and then you said "you should edit your comment.

Now who’s being disingenuous 😂

The implicature of cause and effect is reversed

I agree, I did not make that claim! And I do find it a bit weird that people are using that line of attack. But c’est la vie. I was wrong about what the treatment did, I was wrong about the level of verification it had, however we are singing from the same hymn sheet

For the sake of transparency, I edited before you suggested I did - hence my comment “I had not done the research and have edited my comment above.” 😉

like all of Europe

While Europe does not have an embargo, up until 2016 the EU and Cuba basically had 0 relationship. The EU created “The Common Position” in 1996 which was “to encourage a process of transition to a pluralist democracy” in Cuba which the Cuba government rejected as meddling in their internal affairs.

Then in the 2000s there was a bigger spat where Cuba even started rejecting EU aid.

But since 2017 they’ve actually really warmed relations so this is a super good point!

Thank you for kicking off these research dives with your comments.

100% ready for us markets

How would that be possible during an embargo?

If a treatment is developed in the EMA, there’s a level of cooperation that means drugs can come to market quickly if proven safe and even somewhat effective (Covid vaccine is an extreme example). This treatment would likely be US ready without the embargo in place.

it seems you knew that My original comment was a glib link to a wikipedia page. I had not done the research and have edited my comment above.

Definitely wasn’t bad faith and I do stand by it.

Vaccine does not mean cure. We did not have a Covid cure either. And much like the covid vaccine isn’t 100% effective, neither is this. However, it is proving effective, especially in combination with other drugs and at certain stages of treatment.

Stage 4 clinical trials were concluded in Cuba in 2017. Stage 2 trials were concluded in the US in 2023. I believe, strongly, that the embargo has increased the amount of time the research has taken - cooperation is impossible during an embargo.

Even if they lift the embargo tomorrow the drug wouldn’t come on the market, however it is because of the embargo that the use in treatment has taken far, far longer than it would have otherwise.

Fun fact! Cuba has a vaccine for lung cancer - yes, it works and has been independently verified. No, you can’t have it because embargo.

Cuba have also became the first country to have 0 mother-child transmissions of HIV.

But the US has decided that working with Cuba to prevent hundreds of thousands of deaths each year (in the States alone) is less important than causing “economic dissatisfaction and hardship” to the Cuban people.

Work laptops in particular suck, I find. My first one was lagging, freezing, and crashing within months. The second one is three times as expensive but the same brand and is still not happy.

I also use Windows at home and haven’t had the same experience. I think it’s really manufacturer dependent

Considering how much of the web is AI-generated now (with it predicted to rise to 90% by the end of 2026) we’ve managed to turn a tool for connecting people to a tool for chatbots to talk to one another.

Shovel Knight was kickstarted and they have a total flat hierarchy, fair payment system, and evenly distributed wages and bonuses.

I work for a major games studio and if I started my own studio, I would 100% use crowdfunding. Financing in games is broken.

You tend to need someone with deep pockets willing to eat costs for 2-5 years for 10-100 people (depending on project size) in the gamble it’ll pay off. Because it’s a gamble, the financer (in most cases China’s tencent) are constantly breathing over your shoulder and demanding the impossible (oh all the devs say this’ll take three years? You have six months) and the motive changes from “make enough money for the studio to survive” to “make enough money so your financial backers can get a new boat”.

Then with F2P and live service (where I work) you get the constant demand for growth and perpetual play. Forget that churn is inevitable as people’s moods and desires change. Forget that there’s a maximum number of people in the world that are interested in your game. You have to grow at all costs all the time. That’s what leads to the predatory F2P system.

We also have to remember F2P was born out of Shareware, perhaps my favourite distribution model. In non-corporate hands, it can be a fantastic thing.

Shit ain’t easy for devs. Give them some slack.