The people editing 800+ line files often didn't write them, legacy codebases often stink!
I've dealt with a few over the years with 30k+ line long files, always aiming to refactor that into something more sensible, but that's only possible over a long time.
As systems get more complex slowing down and getting bugs fixed becomes more and more important. If you don't fix them fairly quickly you end up with code elsewhere (either consumers of your APIs, or within your own application) adapting to your bug, leaving you with new bugs when you get around to fixing it!
Yup, my home office has 2x 27" monitors, my camera is just right, as is the mic, I've got a deep, 2m wide real wood sit-stand electric desk, a Aeron chair, all my stuff is right here, it's quiet (though I can always play music loud if I want) and lighting is just right.
I'm within 2 minutes walk of a shop and take-away.
No office I've ever worked at came close, the closest I've had was having dual monitors, as for shops, most offices took longer to get to the front door, never mind actually reach anywhere!
That isn't how a Ponzi scheme works, a Ponzi scheme directly uses fees taken from new members to pay out older ones, lying and saying it's from actual business activity.
Crypto doesn't behave any differently than the stock market (except the fundamentals are a little shakier, okay, a lot shakier).
Stocks do not need buybacks or dividends. They are rights to control a share of a company, which earns (or potentially earns) money. That’s inherently valuable even without a stock market to determine a price. You control a machine, which makes things and earns money.
Crypto is only valuable, because others think so, too. You control a place inside a distributed list. Others think a place in exactly this list is valuable, while all the other lists are shitcoins.
How do you explain the prices of Class-C shares which don't bestow voting rights to the holder? For example, GOOG trades for over 2000 a share. In fact, it even trades at a $50 premium over GOOGL, which offers voting rights. Strange.
You don’t have to control a company personally, you can also rely on other shareholders to do that. You just have to know, somebody is voting in your interests, since you probably won’t do it (but again: you could).
I don’t know whether your statement about the price difference is true and if so, I don’t know why. Maybe different free float? My statement was about inherent value not short term price negotiations via stock exchange.
I thought about an actual attack against my argument: Stocks are just shares of companies, which sell stuff that is valuable because other people think so. Some stuff might have inherent value (because it can generate money), but in the end it still comes down to people deciding something has value. Turtles all the way down.
"You don’t have to control a company personally, you can also rely on other shareholders to do that. You just have to know, somebody is voting in your interests"
How would you know they're voting in your interests?
I've never known how any other shareholder voted in any of the stock I owned. For all I know they could have been voting completely contrary to what I'd wanted.
No. Unless you own enough of a stock to vote and make a difference, stock ownership is not about influencing a company but just about hoping the value of the stock will rise, and there are many theories about why that might happen, from fundamental to technical analysis to people who invest based on the phase of the moon, divination, tips from friends, insider trading, trend following, news, etc.
Those other shareholders also want the shares to retain value, so your interests are aligned regarding my initial argument that stocks are valuable because of the voting rights.
Yes it does. Proof of stake networks (Ethereum, Tezos, etc) pay dividends + transaction fees to stakers, decentralized exchanges pay a cut of fees to token holders (with decent P/E ratios), and the list goes on.
This is an out of date view that does not match the current reality.
As a thought exercise, suppose a proof is stake currency was only used by one person. How exactly does do it’s dividends create value? In short “crypto dividends” don’t actually create any value it’s purely incrementing an arbitrary number rather than creating an income stream.
The same is true if N people use the currency without any new money coming in they can’t cash out. Therefore it’s not an actual dividend. This is why everyone calls crypto a pyramid scheme, the only way to cash out is to get someone else to buy in.
For proof of stake, I agree - I think it's useful to instead focus on net issuance. For ETH2 this could very well could be negative since the base transaction fee will be burned, and transaction fees currently are greater than miner rewards a decent percentage of the time.
Proof of stake coins that don't have much usage and mostly pay out rewards from new issuance have an interesting piece.. - they are inflating the base supply to pay out dividends that holders pay taxes on. Effectively moving normal gains from the capital gains bracket to regular income, which is sub-optimal.
For DeX's, the image is a lot better - the biggest issue here is - are fees arbitrarily high, and will they go down over time. My gut says the percentage fee will go down, but the volume increase will more than make up for this loss.
As a counterpoint, YFI literally buys back it's token from fees earned from users using their automated yield farming strategy. There are plenty of duds around, but that doesn't make everything a dud.
They are likely to do stock buybacks which are the same thing. You’re certainly not buying them for voting rights - FB and Google almost don’t give those out, and ETFs don’t pass on their voting rights but are not cheaper than the underlying stocks.
I'm skeptical of your claim. Based on some other reading [1]:
> To manage your portfolio, you need a way to compare your different investments and decide which are worth keeping. The dividend discount model and the capital asset pricing model are two methods for appraising the value of your investments. DDM is based on the value of the dividends a share of stock brings in, whereas CAPM evaluates risks and returns compared to the market average.
From around that age I've found the Lego games work okayish (progress is slow, but re-spawn is in place, and no progress is lost, you may need to lend a hand with some parts).
Top down toy car racing may be an option, my son enjoyed an indie game, similar to the old Micro Machines games, but that was on Xbox 360, I'm not certain what's out there for iOS.
Yes. Moreover, if you backup the system great, you get peace of mind, but management hardly cares. If you BREAK the system while trying to establish a backup, management cares and it's "your fault."
You have exponentially more to lose than to gain by experimenting with this at all. In this situation you should convey the risks, let the stakeholders decide if/who is going to address this, as it's their risk to take.
Doing even minor things that could distrupt the execution for any time (attaching debugger, installing packet sniffer that blocks network traffic for a sec or cause a packet lost, etc) could deadlock the application.
The only thing I would risk is copy/pasting the binary/executable that is running to somewhere else so I could try and decompile it. Anything beyond that is a nope.
I've dealt with a few over the years with 30k+ line long files, always aiming to refactor that into something more sensible, but that's only possible over a long time.