Having been forced to adopt Deno for new Slack integrations on their new integration platform, I ultimately ended up throwing it in the trash and migrating to the legacy Python SDK.
It has a mixed model open-"legacy" framework which at this point will be a death march.
It's fine, but I don't see it gaining critical mass.
That’s a completely arbitrary limitation which should not exist. When my scripts contain independent non-instant subprocesses, I run them in parallel. I’m also using js/ts to write all my scripts, because why wouldn’t I use a proper programming language instead of that “bash” thing that can’t even handle its single datatype well and resorts to all sorts of gibberish to perform trivial operations on it.
To be quite honest, demanding an ADHD individual deal with focus-thieves on their own and claiming that it is "toxic" to set boundaries that enable them to do their best work is kinda like expecting a recovering alcoholic to work at a liquor store and saying that it's "toxic" for them to refuse to do so.
Except it is toxic; you can't redefine the behavior because of someone's affliction no matter how unfortunate that may be. If you have Tourette's with coprolalia, you can't go around the office yelling "cunt" at the top of your lungs and expect everyone is okay with it, or that you deserve an accommodation.
Except it’s absolutely not if managed appropriately.
If they’re behaving that way unannounced then yeah, it’s not good but if the manager is aware then all that’s needed is “hey team, Andy is on the spectrum and prefers to work this way. Please try to accommodate, any issues let me know”
Those requirements aren’t challenging to meet for a coworker.
It's not toxic to say "all these distractions and interruptions stop me from doing what you pay me to do, here is what I need to do in order to perform my best work". It's toxic to tell that person that they're being toxic, which ADHD people tend to heavily internalize.
It's toxic to say your coworker asking for help is a distraction when all people are supposed to be there to collaborate and get things done together.
Imagine someone comes to your desk and says they need help with something and you say "Please go away, you're distracting me" or you simply ignore their presence. How would they feel?
I'm not saying OP is doing it at that level but I think you can see my point.
Incorrect. Demanding that autistic people change their entire personality to match your expected social norms is toxic and abusive behavior.
I would press you to reflect on why you think you have the right to tell a stranger how to behave. Why your opinion of "correct" behavior is the only possible valid option.
People like you have this assumption that autistic people somehow owe you. That you expect them to go through a great deal of stress and effort to act they way you want. If they do, you give them nothing in return. If they instead prioritize their own comfort and wellbeing, you give them abuse and call them toxic.
Edit: for perspective, telling an autistic person they're toxic for doing what they need to cope is the same as calling a person in a wheelchair toxic because everyone else has to walk slower to keep up. This is abuse and does real harm to people.
Nope. I only expect that my coworkers and I come to agreements on how we will function as a team (read: establish roles and processes) and then make a reasonable effort to stick to what is agreed upon, while discussing any emerging need for changes along the way.
These agreements should take everyone's individuality into account to find a balance or compromise in terms of personal preference and overall comfort (not to mention meeting the goals of the team from technical and business perspectives) which everyone involved finds acceptable.
My comfort is no more or less important than that of others.
There's a subtle difference. OP is saying "I'm disabled and I can't/need help to do X"
The response is "disabled people don't need accommodation, you should just act like you're not disabled no matter the personal cost"
The difference is between asking for help and setting boundaries for what you can tolerate, and telling someone else they're a bad person for being disabled.
One is reasonable, if annoying. The other is a direct attack on an individual.
In all countries of the EU, if you are diagnosed as autistic, you get a disabled passport just as any other disability.
40% disability is very common for diagnosed autistic people, meaning they are categorized with the same amount of impact on their wellbeing as crippled, wheelchaired, or mentally impacted people.
So I think the discussion and comparison that calamari4056 started is very well reasoned and makes sense in the context of "what society expects of you" vs "what you can expect of society".
I'm not sure why you're implying that disabled is a dirty word. That's the word that pretty much every disabled person uses to describe a disability. It's the official legal term for the same.
And yeah, it's a personal attack when you tell someone they're a bad person for having a disability that inconveniences you.
I am delighted to work with people who set clear boundaries. I do think remote teams need to prioritize human connection, but part of that is respecting attention. If there were a problem, I'm sure after years GP would have heard about it.
It is very hard to ignore the instinct of replying to the toxic statement with a sarcastic "no u".
Nevertheless I'll try to put this in neutral terms. Hopefully I get my point across without sounding too punchy.
I'm at work to work. It sometimes feels like managers and companies put you in a double-bind. On one hand I am supposed to be a factory-line worker, solving ticket after ticket. Make whatever metric go up so to speak. On the other I'm supposed to be part of a "community", get involved, be proactive, show my brilliance and creativity..
I've found that I have to place heavy emphasis on the code-monkey side of things. Even if the internal communication is the other way around (e.g. by the usage of the word toxic). Because creativity happens for its own sake, shipping product is a second thought at best. We framed the market in rigid and mechanical terms. And Ii the end we have to abide to that sterility in order to succeed.
Both agree and disagree here. Agree because you have outlined a reality here. Disagree because, on aggregate, the expectation of making neurodiversity confirm is toxic and is a major barrier to productivity and workplace cohesion.
tl;dr: Author author reflects on past experiences and expresses a desire to prioritize and cultivate more moments of fun. Author encourages readers to embrace and seek out opportunities for fun in order to maintain a fulfilling and balanced life.
My gripe: Author ignores responsibilities of being an adult. Author is 25 and ignores their privilege.
Try having kids, or a mortgage, or struggling to maintain friendships, or dealing with your a loved one's ailments. Life is hard, sometimes you can't make time.
tldr: They're trying to pressure SubStack into changing their tune on content moderation, and are meeting them today. Suspect this is just a play to push leadership via PR.
If Substack really wants to be the Nazi bar [1], then that is their prerogative. But if some of their writers don't wish to be patrons of the Nazi bar, then it is their prerogative to urge Substack's leadership to change their minds.
[1] The bartender: "You didn’t see his vest but it was all nazi shit. Iron crosses and stuff. You get to recognize them... You have to nip it in the bud immediately. These guys come in and it’s always a nice, polite one. And you serve them because you don’t want to cause a scene. And then they become a regular and after awhile they bring a friend. And that dude is cool too. And then THEY bring friends and the friends bring friends and they stop being cool and then you realize, oh shit, this is a Nazi bar now. And it’s too late because they’re entrenched and if you try to kick them out, they cause a PROBLEM. So you have to shut them down." https://werd.io/2023/leaving-the-nazi-bar
How is this different from Subsack saying they're pure from degeneracy because they don't allow sex worker blogs? Their free speech schtick is bullshit*.
It's not that nazi ideas can't be allowed to exist (you don't hear me calling for 4chan to not exist because of /pol/ for example), but declining to help monetize them is also free speech.
Free speech has always been about more than what just the government must tolerate. Free speech is also a broader philosophy, that the best way to counter bad ideas is to let those ideas be aired freely and confronted freely by better ideas. Locking bad ideas in a cage will only cause them to rot and fester further.
Ideas don't confront each other, people do. And when the people representing one set of ideas refuse to engage in good faith and instead promote discrimination based on race, gender, and sexuality, they should lose the privilege to have those ideas amplified. 10 years ago it was not controversial that you should become a social pariah for broadcasting hate speech. This whole situation would be utterly juvenile and ridiculous if it wasn't so harmful.
> And when the people representing one set of ideas refuse to engage in good faith
How can you possibly know that, if you prevent the people in question from speaking? Or are you extrapolating the behavior of all members of a group from that of a potentially non-representative sample?
Anyway, even if someone engages in bad faith, it can still be valuable to let them demonstrate that bad faith to the world. Not in every community or platform, necessarily, but somewhere. (Substack, unlike most social media, has no algorithmic feed; you see content only from authors you choose to visit or follow. So you won't be bothered by bigots there unless you choose to seek them out.)
> discrimination based on race, gender, and sexuality,
> hate speech
These terms are often used with many different meanings, can you define them as you are using them here?
> even if someone engages in bad faith, it can still be valuable to let them demonstrate that bad faith to the world.
I think we've heard enough from them. The talking points are tired, the joke is always the same joke. There's nothing to learn here. And besides that, back when it was pretty normal not to indulge this offensive clown show, we had no issue discussing issues of hate speech without allowing it to proliferate. Imagine that.
> These terms are often used with many different meanings, can you define them as you are using them here?
This is exactly what I mean by bad faith. Come on, man. Every single time an advocate for platforming hate speech gets into a debate, they immediately run to hide in a rhetorical quagmire, hoping someone will follow them into it. Find a bigger idiot, I don't play those games.
Happy to expand on this. Only where you would consider to be not boilerplate, aka your business logic. I hate low-code that force me to use a rigid system for the core of my tools, but I love the velocity that it brings. What if we could have high-velocity for all the boilerplate (permissioning, queuing, frontend, secret management, etc, etc) but code for the business logic. That's what windmill is. In a way, this is what serverless was meant to be, write your business logic and servers autoscale and you can hook a gazillon managed services on top.
We bring that vision in a fully open-source and consistent platform that you can host wherever you please.
I suggest you work with a copywriter and come up with a better way of presenting windmill.dev. How you're presenting it makes sense to you, because you built it. You know what you mean when you say words like "boilerplate" and "business logic". That has a specific meaning in your head. But it's different for every person in the software industry. To a customer, it's confusing.
For investors:
> We are a developer platform for enterprise, offering a performance-focused solution for building internal software using code. Our open-source platform allows businesses to focus on their unique business logic while we handle the boilerplate tasks, resulting in high-velocity development and the ability to scale at enterprise levels.
For devs:
> We are a developer platform for enterprise, providing a system for running code written in Python, Typescript, Go, Bash, and query languages at scale. Our platform focuses on performance and offers extensive capabilities to build internal software, including APIs, workflows, background jobs, and UIs. With a fully open-source and flexible architecture, developers can concentrate on their business logic while leveraging our robust ecosystem for efficient development and hosting options.
Generic:
> Windmill is a developer platform designed for enterprises to build internal software efficiently. It combines the speed of low-code solutions with the flexibility of coding, allowing developers to focus on unique business logic rather than boilerplate tasks like permissioning, queuing, and front-end development. Our platform is fully open-source, offering high performance and hosting versatility.
> Our active community of developer users provides constant feedback, driving our platform's growth. By emphasizing commonly used languages such as Python, TypeScript, Go, and Bash, Windmill serves as a generalist tool without compromising quality, enabling complex functionalities within a production-ready, enterprise-scale environment.
I think there is a disconnect in your marketing of the product as well Ruben. From what I can gather, I think you are more suited to be in the RPA(robo/proc/auto) market. Also, since there is a current global push to agresively retool and re-train personnel in AI (ex. state dept. prioritize AI-READY WORKFORCE). I think you can bridge the gap between the world needing to retool workers NOW.. and AI achieving AGI in the near future. Once AGI is achieved, human workers will just become robot(ai) handlers/overseers. Best of luck to you.
With no guarantee of compliance, nor guarantee of a backdoor not being added to this service - it’s hard to put Tuta ahead of any other supposed privacy-first provider. They didn’t pull a TPB and tell the court to get fucked, and exit the country. So it’s hard to assume they’ll ever not comply with a backdoor order.
So instead I’ll opt for the one least likely to go under, with the most features. And it’s not Tuta.
You know that courts exist for a reason, right? I know for a fact that the most infamous ransomware organization at the moment, the one actively targeting hospitals with double extortion and then dumping terabytes of patient data including social security numbers, medical records etc. publicly, used Tutanota at one point to communicate with victims.
This isn't an out of sight out of mind situation, if you ask for bulletproof hosting you will face consequences on way or another and you can't just ignore that in a calculation. Same as you don't ignore the consequences of abuse of political power clearly.
It’s simply. Use a dedicated Amazon account for shopping. Use a credit card when you shop. If Amazon ever denies your claim, chargeback and create a new account.
It has a mixed model open-"legacy" framework which at this point will be a death march.
It's fine, but I don't see it gaining critical mass.