Typography doesn't feel like a moat to me. If a competitor offered better service than AirBnB, nobody would stick around solely because of the typeface. Best you can say is, good design could contribute to a moat, and typography is one part of that.
Also, Wal-Mart's logo is set in Myriad Bold. They made slight alterations to the W, A, and T characters.
> Public personas are a professional necessity, especially in our industry
If I wasn't on hacker news, I would assume you were an actor or a radio talk show host. Maybe you're right, and developers need to have a public persona today. But why does it need to be that way? You aren't performers. You aren't politicians.
Aren’t we though? How is a developer on a software project different than an actor on a set? How is a product requirements doc different than a movie script?
An actor can make or break a film just as a developer can make or break a software project.
I actually think there are far more parallels than differences.
Which performers are in a movie is a major factor in who chooses to view the movie. Which developers created the software is not a major factor in who uses the software for most software. The only exceptions I can think of are software that is used mainly by other software developers.
Personas and reputations are beneficial in any human pursuit. People who are respected and acknowledged more by others have an advantage. We now have the internet and social media and other ways to market one's self. With less networked electric metal things involved, it has been that way since groups of primates started gathering together, and probably well before that with other species. Welcome to being a living being on Earth.
If I'm not mistaken, car makers first lobbied to outlaw jaywalking. So if it's anything like the past, protesting self-driving cars and protesting the laws will amount to the same thing.
This isn't an easter egg, nor a comment in the code. It's dab smack in the manual. Could distract or confuse someone just trying to look up a function. I say we keep the fun expression stuff in places where it won't get in the user's way of doing their job.
Jokes may be fun to write. But when you're scouring a manual for a needed function, and you're confronted with a smarmy joke, it probably won't be as fun (especially if you're reading the manual to troubleshoot something.)
It broke up the relative monotony of otherwise dry technical information. It has a similar effect when placed in code. In addition many companies used it as a form branding - "Hey we're not stuffy old IBM! We're Cool!".
Back then manuals were also far more important, you couldn't operate the machine at all without one. Yet the jokes never managed to stop people from getting the information they needed.
I think the real difference when it comes to manuals is most modern ones are not comprehensive. I could see being upset if there was a joke but no information on my actual problem.
It's in a separate box at the end of the manual for that function. It's generally like a footnote. It being there shouldn't distract or hurt you in any way.
I'm not offended by the joke at all. I'm pro choice.
But I think it's unprofessional to have these kinds of jokes in an important piece of software. This sort of thing just hurts the free software movement's credibility (though not by much).
Came here to complain about the drinking.
When I worked for a startup, they had days where the company bought people beer.
- I don't drink, but I felt pressure to do it anyway, so I could be part of the team.
- There was an alcoholic on the team. Can't imagine what that was like for him.
- People would inevitably get drunk and do stupid shit. I remember when a senior employee got drunk and completely embarrassed herself in front of a client. She was fired the next day.
Can't we enjoy beer at home or at the bar? Why do we have to drink at work?
I get the feeling that for some people, startups are just a way to make college last for ever.
I understand what people say about celebrating a release, but I agree with you that I am against drinking on the job.
I work with several alcoholics, and they are ones that have no desire to get better. It is extremely uncomfortable when management says that you should go out to the bar so you can get to know them better, especially when you drink very little (or several people on my team, not at all). I'm left with the choice, do I socialize and get deal with the potential ramifications, or do I stay away and make myself an outsider?
When I try to "get to know people better" I suggest both a bar and coffee shop - usually close to each other - and ask which they prefer. I'm fine either way and don't care about an explanation so it's 100% up to them with less pressure.
Why do you have a problem with the company buying people a beer on some days? would you also object to a company meal put to celebrate a major release.
I've never seen people forced to drink alcohol at social events BTW.
In the real world you have to realise that not everyone is exactly like you and how to get along and work with people from different backgrounds and cultures.
> would you also object to a company meal put to celebrate a major release
Not at all. I would object though if that meal only included dead animals.
> I've never seen people forced to drink alcohol at social events BTW.
Social pressure is very real.
> In the real world you have to realise that not everyone is exactly like you and how to get along and work with people from different backgrounds and cultures.
Very true. People need to realize that other people have very complex relationships with alcohol. For some people it's a fun party drink that helps you socialize. For others, it's a poison drink that ruined their family and perhaps took a loved one from them. In my opinion, being more sensitive to the latter is more important than catering to the former.
In my country 'drinking together' is also a very important part of the culture, and on Friday's ~4.30pm work stops and the company drinks together. I don't drink and have never encountered any issues with simply saying no (but still attend the event). Curious what negative responses people have encountered.
I wonder too because although I do drink, there have been times where it's just poor timing. I simply say "Sorry, I can't tonight because: antibiotics, driving home, dinner with family, etc, etc" and have had zero issues.
Could people then please just stop commenting on people who don't drink. I stopped drinking and to be honest, it is a pain in the ass to listen to lame comments from people trying to be funny.
Well, at the companies I worked for, usually there was a choice of drinks, and people had no problems putting fruit juice in their glasses. If anyone asked why, they said they're driving, and that was it.
> If anyone asked why, they said they're driving, and that was it.
Exactly. Why do they need to ask? Why do I need to invent some reason why I prefer to drink X over Y? If it was coffee over tea, coca-cola over lemonaid, or water over fruit juce, I wouldn't have to justify those choices to anyone but the most insufferable of people trying to transfer their life/health choices onto me. If a colleague is giving me a hard time every day over my choice to drink coffee because "hey, man, I stopped drinking coffee last week and I feel so much better," I'd be justified in telling them to shut up because I just don't care. But alcohol is on the table and I need to think of an excuse, regardless of whether I'm driving or not. It's bullshit.
We have known for a while that close homophobic bonds (bonding) can create animosity towards outsiders. But not every relationship does this. Some relationships connect us with people outside our normal groups (bridging). The extent to which people bond or bridge varies from person to person, and across time periods.
I suspect this conversation is being had in response to Facebook's tendencies to bring out the worst in people. I think the internet has the potential to create both kinds of social capital. It's helped me stay closer to my friends and family, while also introducing me to people in different countries, or people with different religions. When we design social networking software, we should design it with bridging social capital in mind. If it only encourages bonding, we'll be creating a world of hostile tribes.
