I'm conflicted about this post. On the one hand, it's encouraging and cheerful. On the other hand, it pretends to evaluate HTMX by insisting on conventions which... have nothing to do with HTMX.
Spoiler: HTMX does not deliver under artificial constraints.
They would not. I love Kimmel, but it turns out the story of the gunman is now much more layered and nuanced than "the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them..." In Kimmel's defense, this was a developing story at the time, but it is not untrue, in hindsignt, that Kimmel spread misinformation.
Nothing Kimmel said in the quote you provided is untrue. His statement is about their actions in response to the event, not anything to do with the actual sentiment of the shooter.
I guess you didn't follow updates to the story. I turns out that someone who was a "huge Trump supporter" in 2020 can develop romantic feelings for his trans room mate in the intervening five years since -- and feel a different way on issues.
Only by stretching the facts to distortion can anyone claim the gunman was one of Maga's own in 2025.
Everyone voted them down, but there's a kernel of truth here.
We were all in favor of it when Judicial Activism gave us approved Liberal outcomes starting in the latter half of the 20th Century. We didn't realize that the only thing preventing "the other side" from weaponizing the same tactic was a generation of politicians loathe to violate the separation of powers. Once they all passed away, all hell broke loose and here we are...
As the Left used to point out, "You can't legislate morality." Except... they did. And now they are shocked -- SHOCKED, I TELL YOU -- to discover that the Right has lost its scruples in resisting the same temptation.
"Strung up on the gallows prepared for their enemies" (ancient morality tales) and all that.
I guess the value of this is to encapsulate away various other command-line tools which could perform the same in a script. Lowers the barrier to entry. To my mind, though, this tries hard to tackle a solved problem.
On the other hand -- if it encourages dev teams to stop the silly habit of returning successful health checks from their microservices even before the back-end dependencies (DBs, other web services, etc) are ready, then it might have some value.
> if it encourages dev teams to stop the silly habit of returning successful health checks from their microservices even before the back-end dependencies (DBs, other web services, etc) are ready, then it might have some value
Deciding what starts when shouldn't live inside the things themselves. They should be able to start independently and react accordingly if their dependencies aren't met.
Two reasons:
Dependencies can vanish anyway, once everything's started, so it's silly to special-case starting a microservice.
Microservices can need to behave differently depending on the deployment situation, so you don't want to bake into them a single way of doing things.
I've lived through the recessions of 1990-91 (in my 20s, not tech), the Dotcom bust and the Great Financial Crisis. I can tell you that it's always been this way when its' a "buyer's market" and the employers can afford to be picky. I can also tell you that this is not some game-changing phenomenon[0]. The jobs will return when it is once again a "seller's market" -- which it surely will be. This applies to non-tech job markets as well.
During the DotCom bust I ended up getting a taxi license in NYC and driving yellow taxicabs on 12-hour (standard) shifts for over 18 months. During the GFC, I got trained in HazMat handling and joined contracting companies as an employee cleaning the beaches after the BP oil spill for a year. In both cases, I re-entered the software engineering market as a high-demand candidate and made even more in base and total comp than I had previously.
I am over 50 now. I never transitioned to a management position. Still, I do plan to re-enter the software engineering market when the current winter ends and spring next arrives.
[0] I work with agentic AI on my own projects. Due to limited context windows, even the best models like Claude Opus or Alibaba's Qwen-coder require much more expert handholding than people let on. Even with good context engineering and memory tools.
What could potentially put an end to the current hiring "winter"?
We have an increasing amount of immigrants coming over in hopes of getting a white-collar job, in combination with the tech sector shrinking, as well as companies as a whole being much more careful when hiring.
There would need to be some explosion in the amount of tech jobs, in order for everyone to be able to get one. However, I just cannot see what could cause something like this in the near future.
Presumably the end of such a winter would involve the tech sector growing.
According to wikipedia[0] there doesn't seem to be any significant uptick in H1Bs. Is that what you were referring to by "immigrants coming over in hopes of getting a white-collar job"?
I'm not American but I do find it quite annoying how majority of the economic trends present within the US, are subsequently reflected in Europe with a slight delay.
I think that a slight increase in autonomy of other western countries could go a long way
>You can't imagine the death of an elderly figure pushing questionable tariffs that undermine financial planning happening suddenly in the near future?
The masses are asses. People largely get the govt they deserve, Germans included . Directing your anger at politicians is really lame.
"But the truth — despite the unique challenges that accompany majority stakes in the world’s resources — is that most of the ultrarich seem to die bloodless, unperturbed deaths, and at advanced ages [...] The Dead Billionaires of 2022–23 enjoyed an average lifespan of almost 86 years, outperforming average Americans by more than ten years."
I'll admit it's tactless, but as a presumably European in your other comment what have I sacrileged against God? You asked an economical question it's hard to make economical decisions with repeated 90 day deadlines.
If companies are much more careful when hiring, they would not consider immigrants unless the candidate is exceptional, which doesn’t significantly change the number of opportunities for an average worker.
Contrary to the conspiracy theories, H1B requires the employer to pay market wage or higher, so hiring an immigrant for a white collar job is extra cost and risk, and only makes sense in a low-interest rate environment where finding a qualified candidate becomes a challenge.
The exceptional and even qualified immigrants that would take these jobs are coming at a significantly lower rate since Trump 1.0. And that includes international students that would eventually become exceptional/qualified candidates.
The 50 year old commenter has pointed out the root cause and showed examples of the cycle to explain when the jobs will come back.
> Contrary to the conspiracy theories, H1B requires the employer to pay market wage or higher [...] where finding a qualified candidate becomes a challenge.
Something doesn't add up here. If you are paying the market wage, you fundamentally cannot have challenges finding qualified candidates. The market wage isn't established until you already have someone agreeing to your terms...
H1B is built around the concept of past market wages. This is why the 'conspiracy theories' state that H1B drive down wages. Not because the H1B workers are paid less than other workers, but because they are paid the same.
Consider the scenario where yesterday it took $20 per hour to find a willing worker. Your competitor hired that person. Said worker isn't going to come work for you for $20 per hour. He is already positioned with that. He would come work for you for $30 per hour, though. You could offer him $30 per hour, or you could cry and say that you can't find anyone and then hire an H1B for $20 per hour. Technically, in this scenario, the market wage became $30 per hour, but since the H1B was introduced you were able to bring it back down to $20 per hour.
Which isn't much of a conspiracy theory. That's just basic economics. The macro effects are considerably more complicated, of course. H1Bs are granted on the understanding that having two workers being paid $20 per hour is more net beneficial to society than one worker making $30 per hour. Including economically over the long term — where businesses that are able to expand with more workers will eventually be able to pay all workers more, although the "trickle down" crowd will dismiss that idea.
The so-called conspiracy theories disagree with that notion, believing, no doubt because they are thinking of it from an individualistic point of view rather than a worldly point of view, that they would be better off making $30 per hour instead.
There was also a trend of outsourcing in tech after the DotCom bust, but that was reversed (and arguably not as much of a problem as it first seemed to be).
I think that was a pretty small trend. The trend I'm hearing today is 300k jobs are being offshore annually and that around 75% of those are in the tech sector. Assuming a company could only hire half as many people here due to peice differences, that would be about 9k more jobs per month.
I wonder if with AI it is possible for someone to be a productive entrepreneur easily than finding a job in today’s market. Specially for someone over 50.
I will start with a basic markdown outline and then use a prompt describing more of the system in just flowing (yet coherent) thought and, crucially, I'll ask the model to "Organize the spec in such a way that an LLM can best understand it and make use of it." The result is a much more succinct document with all the important pieces.
(or -- you can write a spec that is still more fleshed out for humans, if you need to present this to managers. Then ask the LLM to write a separate spec document that is tailored for LLMs)
