If your kid is having troubles leaning to ride a bike, I would suggest trying one of the bikes from Woom (https://woom.com/). Especially in the smallest models for 4-5 year olds, these bikes much lighter - almost half weight - than a lot of the alternatives. They also cost a lot more, but the high resell value makes up for some of this.
This is one of the biggest hurdles to getting kids to enjoy riding bikes too. If you think about the weight of many cheaper kids department store bikes they are a significant weight compared to the child. Having a lighter bike makes it much more enjoyable for the kids.
Also recommend Islabikes and Frog bikes for two companies that offer lighter offerings. Again you have to pay for it, but they can often be resold and a decent value later. Especially if you keep the bike clean and loved.
I have a mechanical engineer friend who's deeply interested in bikes, he recently designed and welded his own DIY cargo bike, he gave me an hour long lecture on the evolution of frame geometry and alloys when I asked him to help me pick a second hand bike, etc—and he's very, very impressed by Woom bikes. I got one for my kid and the engineer will just look at it, admire the parts and go "oohh yeah now that's a bike."
Yeah, I agree that StackOverflow it but a shadow of what it used to be, and that this is a shame. But I don’t think that AI is to blame for this - all the interesting discussions had already migrated to GitHub issues. AI is just the nail in the coffin for SO.
My personal experience is that you have to blame the people and not the method.
I would define my current project as very agile in the sense that we only have details plan for what to do a week ahead at the time. Each week the team has an hour long meeting where we present what we have done, and discuss if it's good enough. If something like a hover region is found to be wrong it will get fixed for next week. If you find this issue while working on something else, you make task and PR and just fix these smalls things. I feel like this way of working is what what meant by the people who invented the idea of making software development agile.
I agree. The best interview experience that I had was to be sat in front of a small app that had lots issues, both big and small, and also a lot an not-really-issues-but-still like inconsistent code styles and names, and code comments and code that weren't aligned. This was a great starting point for both me and the interviewer. The interviewer had a list of things to ask into about the code, so that we didn't get stuck.
I believe 'var' was introduced in C# to make it much easier to work with LINQ, where you can easily return a subset of properties - without var you would have had to declare interfaces. I think ReSharper is responsible for the rapid proliferation of using var everywhere.
Is ReSharper that prevalent? I've always thought it a small subset of programmer's who use it but are very vocal (and preachy). I've only seen it used twice 'in the wild'. And one of those two times most of the devs hated it because it was a performance hog, it was a preachy 'architect' shoving it down their throats.
I don't use resharper, personally found it far too opinionated in what I felt were bad ways. Plus it often resulted in poor performance in VS.
For years I've used var pretty much exclusively, it's just easier than typing the type twice. Even after they introduced new().
With the new array-like declarations I'm considering switching to declaring the type on the left rather than the right.
Which, in the end, is all this syntax is, a pretty way to stop you needing to declare the type twice. And now you can either do it on the right of the expression like this:
var things = new List<string>();
Or on the left:
List<string> things = [];
Although, one of the nice things about using var is that it makes it easy for your eye to scan a bunch of variables declared together as they line up.
Just curious, but did it ever make sense to launch on Product Hunt? I would assume that the claim that "most users on Product Hunt are developers, designers, or founders" has always been true.
> I would assume that the claim that "most users on Product Hunt are developers, designers, or founders" has always been true.
Their user base is narrower than that, IMO. Actual founders (not just wannabe founders) are too busy to be scrolling Product Hunt all day. If they do, they’re more likely to be there to rip off your idea than pay you for it. Developers prefer sites like HN or engineering blogs.
Product Hunt caters to product managers and designers.
Add networking users to the list, who engage in paid upvoting campaigns. After my first and last post on product hunt I got 3 different requests for "Supportive Product Review" within 4 hours.
I should probably look this up somewhere on the net, but here goes anyway: What was the basis for Elon not receiving his stock award?
As I understand it, he and the stock holders made an agreement some years ago, that entitled Elon to a certain amount depending on how the stock performed. It turns out the stock performed really well, entitling Elon him to a really, really big bonus. I get that this is somewhat weird given that people are being fired and that Tesla is currently not able to sell their cars at the same rate as they are being produced. But is this enough to withhold the bonus? Are there some aspects of the agreement that Elon did not adhere to? From my point of view it looks like Elon was simply able to make a really good deal with the shareholders.
A judge found that the bonus was awarded basically by Elon to himself, so it was invalidated. Technically it was awarded by the board, but at a time when Elon had extreme control over them.
> Musk controlled only 21.9% of Tesla’s voting power, so he lacked mathematical voting control...
> Defendants sought to prove otherwise, and they generally contend that the stockholder vote was fully informed because the most important facts about the Grant—the economic terms—were disclosed...
Basically, the shareholders voted on the grant while having a full understanding of the economic terms. It was awarded by musk, to musk, with approval of the shareholders and (supposedly overly friendly) board.
It really makes it sound like the judge might have been wrong based on the sequence of events we have now, which is:
1. The shareholders approve a stock grant on economic terms
2. A judge says "If the shareholders knew everything, they wouldn't have approved that"
3. The shareholders, now knowing everything, approve it again despite it having almost no benefit now
That really really makes it sound like the shareholders did in fact want to approve it in 1, and so the information they didn't know wasn't all that important, was it?
I know it's a different set of shareholders then and now, but still...
> A judge says "If the shareholders knew everything, they wouldn't have approved that"
That's not what the judge said. It's more like "this award didn't follow the requirements for such an award for a corporation in Delaware". It doesn't at all depend on some prediction about what the shareholders would or wouldn't do in other hypothetical scenarios.
Tesla stocks have a lot of hype especially from Cathie of Ark. Nearly everywhere from spams to YT to FB, you have a lot of "ads" to promote Tesla. Anything EVs good news straight away related to "Tesla" even if it is about Toyota or BYD bad news, seems like Tesla getting credit instead. At current stage I am convince somekind of coordinated and multi layered pump and dump is happening. We are at the "pump" stage. Anyone doing a decent research will see Tesla has near no moat unlike Apple, Nvidia or Microsoft. No battery factory. No owning any lithium mine. No gpu productions. Factories depend heavily on China grace. High churn of employees. Solarcity gone. Autopilot rebranded as FSD which is not even reaching 3.0 after half a decade of promises. CyberTruck design are joke. Any trainees working in BMW or BYD can design a better CyberTruck. Gigafactory? Hahaha...you got a chance take a look BYD factories. Even Taobao warehouses will make Amazon warehouse look like medieval setup. There are Chinese factories that look more like Star Trek than ANY gigfactory. Just ride the hype part and make sure you do the dump earlier before the actual dump happening by the elites.
They also have balance bikes.