I always go with: It is your job to answer. The extended version: If you don't like it you can search for a different job where you won't get questions from me.... but there probably will be others with similar questions or even harder ones. etc basically go on endlessly about the hypothetical them working someplace else. Next time it happens I return to the subject.

Then a coworker showed an even more sophisticated version of the same joke. He created a nearly identical relationship but he would look for job offers matching their resume and pitch them. Look, this is closer to where you live and the pay is better!

If anything it got worse. We've been looking at those icons for so long now that if you change it I'm not going to be happy.

Should even be possible to have an AI operate the computer, screen record the application and build a document that looks identical. Build them on demand with a cache.

This is exactly what I've been thinking for decades.

I once made a proof of concept. Wikipedia use to have static menu entries. I had a greasemonkey script that hides some of them them.

For entries that shouldn't be hidden the line that hides them is commented out.

https://userscripts-mirror.org/scripts/review/170442

Then I had a form that let you pick which ones you want. It spit out a gm script with all entries commented out except from the ones you wanted to keep.

https://go-here.nl/gm/wikipedia-clean-up.php

I also wrote this as a joke.

https://neanderthal.go-here.nl

When a link or button is clicked the server return a js file that contain one function. Then it executes the function.

To borrow your example, when you've picked the functionality you want in your note taking app a version number like 1.0.0.unixtime can be generated and stored so that you can later populate the config form with the chosen configuration and add or remove things.

Or you could do something with a config file to populate the form again.

An LLM can also modify a config file. Before execution it can be validated, as it is so simple it can show which mandatory entries are missing, which ones are spelled incorrectly.

If you provide the LLM with the html form or the config file (+docs) it shouldn't have much difficulty generating exactly what you wanted.

As the application has now been turned into ravioli it also addresses the ancient puzzle of separating feature updates from security updates.

You can still introduce a new gui that confuses the hell out of users. Then if no one checks the box you can take your learnings from it without 1000 people having to tell you in 500 different places.

[] Icons? [] Text? [] Icons AND Text?

In this case you can just let it fail. I suspect people on archaic browsers are much more likely to prefer it that way.

The joke is that those who react have no idea and those who don't have no idea either. I never use react so I'm going to have to go with: Those other companies are also just bad. (joking) If everyone can work with/without it should be fine? As long as you don't try to do both.

For this specifically I would have the "you have upvotes" banner in the dom already with a class display:none.

I consider it a huge advantage to have the code for both the counter and the banner in the same place. thisCounter++; thisBanner.className = "shown";

don't search, ask an llm. Ask it to keep it as simple as possible and have it explain the tags you've forgotten.