I guess what's more important for me is the type of work. I'm looking for startup work that's a bit more secure now, if that's possible, lol! Doesn't seem so easy to find.

Examples? Every time I see kubernetes pop up it's because of better performance or lesser costs.

We had a C++ service. It needed high availability, but didn't have super high resource requirements. Our setup was an ec2 instance (c5.xlarge) to build and release AMIs (a bash script using debootstrap to build the AMI which someone wrote 10 years ago probably), an autoscaling group of 3 t2.small instances spread across AZs, and an ALB.

The total cost of this was perhaps $200/mo, and we had incredibly good uptime.

So, what's the catch? Well, it took the service about 20 minutes to build, and about 35 minutes from clicking the "deploy new version" to it actually running. Someone higher up noticed, and a bright-eyed infra engineer said k8s would make the deploy cycle faster.

Fast forward a year. Our autoscaling group is now 3 c5.xlarge instances because the kubelet + docker + coredns + all this other k8s gunk I don't understand need significantly more CPU than our app does (and without giving them more CPU, deploy times were much slower since downloading and unpacking the image was so slow). We have a new logging system (our old logging setup wasn't cloud native apparently) that takes a gig more memory per node. A gig of memory per node to support our service, which peaks at 200MiB RSS. Building and deploying a new version still takes about 35 minutes because compiling C++ is the exact same speed in a dockerfile as it is on an ec2 instance.

It costs about $600/mo, and it has far more operational load. When it isn't having any issues, the p99 is identical.

> better performance or lesser costs

It seems like the opposite of what you'd expect. K8s is adding more components. It's adding more resource usage. Why wouldn't that be slower and cost more?

http://tomassedovic.github.io/roguelike-tutorial/

https://github.com/tomassedovic/roguelike-tutorial

There are no official builds you can download since this is something you're supposed to read and follow along, building your own game in the process.

I have made my own "proper" roguelike (moved away from libtocd, but kept Rust) but that was unrelated to the post.

(I'm the author of the article, but not the OP)

You arrive at one.google.com and all it says is something about your storage. Is that what it's all about?

Here's what it says in the Google Description (you have to Google what one.google.com is to find out what it does - hilarious!).

"Get expanded cloud storage, access to help from Google experts, and more benefits — in one simple plan that you can share with your family."

So, from this it's storage + experts + some mysterious other benefits - and it's about sharing it with your family.

Why don't they at least say that on their front page?! The reason, cos Google don't employ any decent usability experts.

* extra storage (google drive + google photos + gmail).

* phone photos and contacts backed up (there's a Google One app)

* "access to experts"

* discount on google purchases in "Google Store" - so for Pixels and DayDreams? Does Stadia count?

* discount when booking hotels through google.

Super weird mix of features. The meat of the offering seems to be more storage.

They must, surely?

It seems more likely to be the "one-button mouse effect" where leadership dictates something like "minimal interface" to be king and refuses to believe anyone could possible not understand their product?

> Expanded storage, access to experts, and more – all in one shareable plan

I see that they offer some discounts in Google stores and for hotels. I see that you can share the storage (and cost) with your family.

So overall 100GB for $20/year. Not completely awful, though I know plenty of people that use more storage for that just for photos.

Still, I'm thinking whatever you found on web search added little or no information to what's on the page that's linked.

My question to you is this: why do you believe that? I think we have all witnessed a growth in popularity in front-end MVC frameworks, but are they the correct solution to all problems?

I mean, kind of. You don't really need much controller logic most of the time anymore. Last Rails backend I wrote probably involved personally writing a few lines of code here and there. Generally, I'm just pushing a JSON object back and forth. Auth and emails can just be 3rd party. The vast majority of controller type behavior ends up client side at this point. Partly, because its way simpler to scale with you push as much processing to the client as you can. Also, look at something like Firebase or Hoodie as examples of simple stores that require no backend logic.

Its not that Rails and Symfony are useless, I use them all the time, its just that they are kind of dated concepts. Heck even Wordpress solves a specific problem on the backend enough to be useful sometimes. That said Drupal at this point is such a dated concept(superseded by things like Rails and Symfony many years ago) that is should no longer be used.

Happy to argue this ad infinitum but, basically, nothing (let me repeat that - NOTHING) is private once handed over to Facebook.

And that extends to data your friends upload about you.

I'm not talking about anonymous, aggregated data. I'm talking about actual personal private data.

I developed web apps for 14 years before building ios apps for 5 years.

The last couple of years I've worked on both native apps and responsive web sites.

Both can be pains in the ae. But the pain points are different.

Both are moving rapidly. eg Ios: having to rejig xibs to storyboards was annoying.

Css: Supporting older versions of IE has been a pain.

I could go on at length but plenty of people have already done so.

For example, here is something that was on the HN front page just a few weeks ago: http://clean-swift.com/mobile-development-projects-fail/