All new features are gated behind feature flags that progress from the developing team, to all GitHub employees, then to public over a multi-week span. Larger changes like this one have an internal discussion post shared with the company and a changelog entry once published.
I'm not sure that's all that much better. I'm not sure what's worse. There not being QA, or things just flowing right through QA. I guess still the former, since when there is QA, it's probably still filtering off some of the insanity. It's just that it's never seen by the greater public.
Respect has to be earned, and I don't think anyone (within margin of error) with UX in their job title has earned it. Most of their work consists of shuffling design elements around for its own sake. Sometimes they strike gold (or at least silver or copper), but it never feels like that's done because they target a better design, rather they stumble upon it while making designs whose goal is to be different.
You have to go back to when it was called HIC (Human–computer interaction) to find people who weren't completely brain-dead or ad-pilled when it came to design, did actual work and research trying to make better designs, and thus were at least somewhat respected.
Most people with UX in their job title these days aren't really UX designers. They're graphic designers that now have UX in their title because that is the fashion.
The only way I can read that is 'setting a cap does nothing' but reading that tells me that it only turns on email notifications. Not any better really. It's simply not a cap. It's an alarm.
Agreed. I don't agree with the underlying design decisions either, but you literally set a "Budget Alert" on Google Cloud. It's designed to be an alarm, not a cap. I was just trying to point that out
Retail business profit margins have always been low single digit percentages. More staff can only mean higher prices. I'll gladly scan my own stuff to have lower prices and be able to get out quicker.
> Retail business profit margins have always been low single digit percentages.
And yet overall profits remain high - they’re high-volume low margin businesses.
> More staff can only mean higher prices.
When you’re talking about massive chains that are prioritizing profits, usually on behalf of shareholders, that is true. For smaller businesses, coops, or even gov run grocery stores - things that aren’t as focussed on rates of return for investors - it can just mean less profits for the owners.
> I'll gladly scan my own stuff to have lower prices and be able to get out quicker.
It hasn’t matched my experience that prices fell as self checkouts were installed. I think profits went up, prices didn’t come down. Maybe the “quicker” bit… except only if I have just a handful of items.
> And yet overall profits remain high - they’re high-volume low margin businesses.
Why would they not be high? The purchasing power of the currency goes down day after day. If nominal profits are not hitting highs day after day, then you are losing purchasing power.
> It hasn’t matched my experience that prices fell as self checkouts were installed. I think profits went up, prices didn’t come down.
Profit margin is the relevant metric to look at for this context. It is possible prices would have gone up 10% instead of 5% if not for the automation. It is also possible the automation fails to reduce costs.
There are no guarantees in life, just bets that may or may not pan out. Long term trends will the story, but for now, the profit margins make me happy that I don’t invest in grocery stores.
You're blaming the store, which I agree with. My question was whether you could blame the GP, or the consumer in general. They have little control over how much the staff of their grocery store is being paid.
People have different preferences. What's to be confused about that?
I share their preference. The cashier saves me no real amount of work. The difference between putting my groceries on a conveyor belt and having a cashier scan them, and me myself dragging my groceries past a scanner, is somewhere between minimal and non-existent. The amount of work I perform is functionally the same. The biggest difference is in the amount of time I spend, where the win clearly goes to the self-checkout, since then I can bag my groceries at the same time as I scan them, and there's more self-checkouts available than normal ones, meaning I spend less time queuing if I use those.
My first reaction to this was that someone made a mistake somewhere. They saw the game title and the front page, assumed it was a porn game due to it's rating or whatever, or made some other assumption that doesn't hold up to even cursory research, which would confirm the game's had two releases, the former of which has 100k+ reviews on Steam, and the second of which was even physical on consoles.
But no. The post mentions it was pulled due to a TOS violation with regards to its depiction of 'sensitive themes'. That would seem to suggest the problem lies with the game depicting suicide or just its other depictions of mental health problems in general. It could still be a mistake, in that they researched it to the point that they figured out it was dealing with those themes, but not to the point of figuring out it's a successful darling of a game. This seems rather unlikely.
Either way, fact that it's even possible to pull from the store, several months after it was first published without issue, without at least having a chat with the publisher first, is worrying.
One the one hand, yes. On the other hand, it's unreasonable to have to wait 5 minutes to download a 1 MB government PDF form. I guess they too can be optimised so they aren't all that bad, but they often aren't. What can't be optimised is having to upload an image of that form with a signature on it, or whatever else it may be.
Reading plain EPUBs on whatever device has been a fairly good experience in my opinion, given that that is more or less just going to be the physical book in digital form. Then again, the only way I think people actually find those are through free online downloads and not any actual store front.
Given the choice between 'tainted digital experience' and 'plain analogue experience', I can't blame consumers for choosing the latter, but the 'plain digital experience' does exist. It's just not sold.
I wonder how long it's going to take before the analogue experience becomes tainted. It's, sadly, not unthinkable to put ads in books. I guess there's little point from the perspective of the relevant people if they can't make those ads personalised, but maybe if the enshittification goes far enough, it could happen.
In my opinion, it’s important to support those publishers and stores that do choose to sell unencumbered media, so that they have some justification to keep doing it.
> Then again, the only way I think people actually find those are through free online downloads and not any actual store front.
Mostly correct, but some publishers have seen the light.
Asimov's magazine used to be on kindle subscriptions, then on some dubious application no one had heard of, but now they offer drm-free epubs, for example.
For some non-zero percent of ads, I can understand this point of view. But most ads aren't funny, nor are they about new or interesting things. Maybe me and my friends are compleatly out of touch, but when I ask, they struggle to think of ads that have made any positive impression that aren't 10 years old by this point.
I've heard of people who consider all the generic ads out there to be compelling and will buy just the worst garbage out there because their brain is wired that way. To them, I'd consider those ads as psychological and economic abuse.
I like HTML and will use it for my own projects, but I cannot send pure HTML to someone who's not a into tech, so to speak, and expect them to actually read it. It doesn't take much CSS to make a readable web page, and I actually kind of like the barebones no-CSS HTML style, but for many others, that style reads as 'this page is broken'. I guess I can write all my styles inline or in the header, but that's a big ask when I never do that normally.
Markdown though, especially if you're not using way too much of it and mostly using it sensibly, just to give your document some structure, can be read as plain text by pretty much everyone, and will be implicitly understood. Sure, they might not understand the exact different between a word with asterisks on either side and one with underscores on either side, but they'll get that you meant to emphasise that work. They'll also understand a list shown with asterisks, while <ul> and <li> tags will get too verbose for them and clutter the actual content (I don't really care, but I get why they do).
Big assumption you're making there.
reply