The amount of "gotchas" in this process and the tooling required just to use git + email seems insane to me. If it works for you, great, but I don't expect a new hire (experienced or not) to pickup this flow and run with it.
A few comments in-line, but I don't want to "sell" anything to you, so just FWIW.
> The amount of "gotchas" in this process and the tooling required just to use git + email seems insane to me.
The base system is really, really simple, but there are some common rules/guidelines that just help when working together, and those are required for forge based workflows too (or do you like a single commit touching a dozen completely different, unrelated things, or just no info at all in the commit message, or pull request, for why a change was done).
The core thing from this workflow is using `git send-email [email protected] <commit-revision>`, the rest are a few details, possible slightly intimidating if viewed from a distant, but each separate and easy to master/implement on it's own – and most are a "set up once, be done thing", so not constant work.
> If it works for you, great, but I don't expect a new hire (experienced or not) to pickup this flow and run with it.
As mentioned in another comment: We hired over 15 people in the last year, most of them had no experience with git send-email and mailing list development, but they all accustomed fast and after a few weeks most of them stated they find it nicer (as in simpler, less clutter quicker to do submit own work or review others) - I myself started out over eight years ago at this place, i.e., without much experience in mail based development, and I never ran into bigger problems – on the contrary, this workflow felt like a breadth of fresh air compared to what was I used before (mostly GitHub and GitLab).
Note: this works not only for small to medium, but also is the only way that actually works for the biggest projects in the world (e.g., Linux or QEMU).
Just to be sure: I do not say mail(ing list) based development workflow is Just Perfect™, it sure has its problems and can be improved, and may we get some good web GUIs that tie a few of the components together, currently I see https://sourcehut.org/ as strong contender here.
Tracking physical assets with NFTs will not end well, no way (that I have seen) to ensure the ownership is in sync. I've attempted to find out more in the past, see this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29271460, but the answers were not confidence inspiring and missed the point. There are services that claim to do this, however there is no guarantee that the person selling an asset needs to mention there's an NFT associated with the ownership of it.
For a real asset to be backed by an NFT it seems your options are either to maintain physical control over the asset, or to use legal maneuvering on other claims of title to make the NFT hold value. So a painting or gold bar goes in a vault and only changes hand after the NFT is sold, and land sales become contingent on NFT transfers - and I suspect a ton of people would be incredibly surprised to hear that even contractual clauses with indefinite survival periods very rarely last forever, instead surviving only for a defined statutory period!
So under option one the NFT means the real item is worthless (and potentially not ever yours) because it is never in your actual possession, under option two it is subordinated to existing law.
A lawyer friend once jokingly said anyone drawing a contract should replace any mention of "NFT" with "magic bean" and see if the fundamentals still held: if they did, you don't need a blockchain; if they don't, the contract is already deficient.
If you're paying $500 / month, what incentive does Tinder have to find you a lasting partner? That is assuming finding a long term relationship is the goal, which it not the case all the time. That being said, I don't have any alternate pricing models in mind, pricing / monetization is hard.
Tinder is one of the few (edit: potentially) honest matchmaking services. As in, it doesn't lose if you find a partner, since most matches are intentionally short term.
Matchmakers that promise long term relationships have an inherent conflict of interest.
If there wasn't "The Office" to begin with, then what would people use to specify their version of "The Office"? Or how would that idea of "The Office" become popular in the first place for people to want to create their own version (Assuming the tools were in place to generate your own content)? I think there's a lot of value in communicating about shared ideas, eg people love to talk about movies/shows/etc, there's whole communities around a shared idea. I'm curious to see how individualized content impacts this.
"The Office" is a product of the convergent evolution of workplace satire that started well before "Dilbert". It occupies a shared space with "IT Crowd", "Silicon Valley", "Horrible Bosses", "Office Space", thousands of comics, articles, etc.
There will never be another "Office". People will continue to riff on it, produce fan fiction, and make pop culture references to it, but ultimately the next thing that occupies that space will be brand new.
Shapes of ideas are similar but get executed differently. And sometimes we stumble across some rather unique executions that speak to us at our moment in time and spread like wildfire.
I have no doubt people will continue doing this for as long as we remain a thinking species.
I used to work for geek squad. They actually subcontract any work that can't specifically be done in store. I'd hardly call their service "general purpose computing maintenance" as it only extends to things they've done the install for and that's limited to items sold at the store. However they will provide maintenance, via those subcontractors, to items that fit that scope, such as replacing the bulbs for home theater projectors when they burn out.
ChatGPT has made up sources when I've asked for them, so I wouldn't 100% trust it to provide great sources.
Also, if ChatGPT just redirects you to search, doesn't that remove most of the value?
> Also, if ChatGPT just redirects you to search, doesn't that remove most of the value?
That's pretty much the conclusion I've already come to. I have to verify everything ChatGPT tells me, so using it is pointless if I already know where/how to look something up.
Totally agree, it is odd that the author of the article labeled "open startups" as a movement. I can see why they did so, labeling it as a movement improves the story, makes you a "thought leader", etc, which all leads to better marketing / sales.
"A persona requires misrepresentation, which is not the same as de facto anonymity."
I don't this this is correct, as a persona can accurately represent you, its just a persona. If you want to continue to be anonymous with a persona that represents you, I think differential privacy could help in this situation.
How do you ensure the ownership of the physical item is kept in line with the ownership of the NFT? Eg if the physical owner sold or gifted the item or it was stolen? It seems like the NFT is likely to have incorrect information over time.
I was being sarcastic; there is no legal basis for an NFT to be any different than, say, the URL in your browser. You can copy it all you want, but it doesn't convey ownership in any way.
This is not true. For example, ownership of an NFT (and burning it) can constitute payment for an intellectual property license to do something like put music into an advert or use it in a film.
My question remains, how do you ensure the physical item ownership is kept up to date with ownership of the NFT? Even if that is in the terms of service, someone could still steal an item, making the NFT ownership and physical item ownership out of sync.
The first generation of physical assets are vaulted: numbered gold bars, numbered collectibles, fine art.
The application is B2B trading of assets between dealers, so they don't have to mess around with devaulting every time the assets change ownership, introducing risk of fraud every time.
There is also a lot of insurance involved, to answer your probably next question: if the vault loses something or an employee accidentally drives a forklift over it, the NFT holder gets paid.
