Java is still the default choice for many for enterprise software. Job-focused courses and curricula all over the world are still leaning big on Java ensuring a steady and large pool of okay Java devs.
Job focused Bachelor courses and curricula highly outnumber rigorous CS courses like the ones you are likely to find in MIT, UCLA-B, IISc, IITs, Oxford, UCL, Tsinghua, Peking, etc.
I've been super duper happy with AntennaPod since I discovered it a few years ago! It's perfectly useable right out of the gate but has nice customizations if you want/need it. And the Android Auto support is great (essential since I do most podcast listening in the car).
Caveat: I *only* listen to Podcasts on my phone so I don't have to think about syncing library/status between devices.
For listening on my PC I use 'Bluetooth Audio Receiver' and still just play from my phone and use my computer as an audio device. I've found any advanced setups just no longer worth the setup investment/hassle. Literally nothing in this future timeline works well in any complex setup. So I keep it simple. It all exists in it's own magic box. And if I get a call, etc, all that auto behavior (stop playback) just works.
To be fair, in Star Trek you will see them carrying around like 3-4 data tablets, so even our broken enshittified tech works in a way Star Trek future predictors thought would be high tech.
I recently switched from Pocket Casts to AntennaPod. AntennaPod is also available in F-Droid, which Pocket Casts isn't. It feels less likely that AntennaPod will be enshittified, which is why I made the switch.
> In my experience, the 996 teams aren’t actually cranking out more work. They’re just working odd hours, doing a little work on the weekends to say they worked the weekend, and they spend a lot of time relaxing at the office because they’re always there.
That's exactly what happens. Some companies' management values asses in the office, and the fitting kind obliges. They come in at 9, leave at 8/9 in the evening, but a lot of the times they are scrolling the social media, doing chit chat, reading blogs, etc. whenever they can (can't do other serious work/learning, as such companies tend to actually spy on what you are doing).
They take 90 minutes long lunch breaks, take walks to smoke, etc. But the bossman can hold a meeting with them at 1 or 3 in the morning sometimes. These get a lot of praise at such companies.
They retain the worst kind of 'talent'. These companies often hire decent technical talent, but with another dimension lacking, like poor communication skills, or a no-name college- knowing that they won't land better offers soon.
Often fearing market, some good people oblige, too, but then tend to quit after a year or two due to burnout.
Managers are the worst. They are perpetually in meetings having conversations much worse than free ChatGPT, but they can say that they are 'working' long hours, and in weekends, setting the bar for ICs.
Productivity is lower than 9-6-5 teams. But many people haven’t come out of the sweatshop/manual labour mentality.
X algorithm is the most tunable I have come across.
I can mute all words I don't like to see, and hit a bunch of "Not Relevant"s once a month or so, and my X feed has only relevant content. And it has very high density.
I like the vibes of Fedi, but there is not enough density.
And Bluesky is just Old Twitter 2.0 without the density of technical stuff. That's the default feeling.
In this note, Facebook algo perform the worst. No matter how much signal I send to the algorithm by watching videos for longer, liking, commenting on stuff of my liking, hitting "Not interested" a lot, it still shows me the lowest commonly understandable dumb thing again and again.
YouTube algo is also very trainable and enjoyable.
X algorithm is the most tunable I have come across.
I can mute all words I don't like to see, and hit a bunch of "Not Relevant" once a month or so, and my X feed has only relevant content. And it has very high density.
I like the vibes of Fedi, but not enough density.
And Bluesky is just Old Twitter 2.0 without the density of technical stuff. That's the default feeling.
I am glad that I never decided to become a photoshop pro. I always contemplated about it, seemed attractive for a while, but glad that I decided against it. RIP r/photoshopbattles.
It was in the endless list of new shiny 'skills' that feels good to have. Now I can use nano-banana instead. Other models will soon follow, I am sure.
Retouching is an art. To the pro, this is just another tool to increase efficiency. You pay them not just for knowing how to use Photoshop, but for exercising good judgement. That said, I imagine this will shrink the field, since fewer retouchers will be able to do the same work, unless the amount of work goes up commensurately. Will people get more retouching done if the price goes down? Not sure.
Especially colouring, In college I worked for a dude who would re-colour old B&Ws for people, 60% the work (the work he enjoyed) was trying to research enough to know reasonably well what colour something actually ought to be, not just what we thought looked good.
Interesting take. I'm a programmer, but learned Photoshop in the early 2000s and had a blast making and editing images for fun. Sure, the generative models today can do a far better job than anything I could come up with, but that doesn't detract from the experience and skills I picked up over the years.
If anything, knowing Photoshop (I use Affinity Designer/Photo these days) is actually incredibly useful to finesse the output produced by AI. No regrets.
> learned Photoshop in the early 2000s and had a blast making and editing images for fun
> "had a blast"
One can have blasts in many things nowadays. Like playing Factorio, writing functional code for recreational problem solving, playing Chess, making SBC/Microprocessor projects for fun, doing Math for fun, and so on...
Photoshop just couldn’t compete with the existing blasts in my life, and I felt a little bad for not learning it. But that teeny, tiny bad feeling has been wiped away by nano-banana.
If you commented it a decade ago, I would say that at least you own the program and skills in case Google decides to turn off the lights or ask prohibitive price tag.
Now you need to pay subscription for PS and maybe there would be some decent open weight model released.
Programming and everything else will eventually fall to automation, too. It's just a matter of time.
Engineering probably takes a while (5 years? 10 years?) because errors multiply and technical debt stacks up.
In images, that's not so much of a big deal. You can re-roll. The context and consequences are small. In programs, bad code leads to an unmaintainable mess and you're stuck with it.
I'm unclear as to which side of the argument you're taking.
If you think that these tools don't automate most existing graphics design work, you're gravely mistaken.
The question is whether this increases the amount of work to be done because more people suddenly need these skills. I'm of the opinion that this does in fact increase demand. Suddenly your mom and pop plumbing business will want Hollywood level VFX for their ads, and that's just the start.
it's still a useful skill to know photoshop. AI images can be great but you are almost always going to want to A. create the base composition yourself B. clean up artifacts in the AI generation and C. layer AI compositions into a final work.
Despite the fact that it was written by a terrorist, it’s a correct recommendation. It has an unexpected staying power, even if you fully disagree with it.
Job focused Bachelor courses and curricula highly outnumber rigorous CS courses like the ones you are likely to find in MIT, UCLA-B, IISc, IITs, Oxford, UCL, Tsinghua, Peking, etc.
reply