Their claims sound too good to be true, if you ask me. I am especially skeptical since they advertise that they will export your data to GitHub [0] and give their own website's repo as example [1].

[0] It's on the bottom of their homepage somewhere.

[1] https://github.com/the-domains/the-grid

> You want someone to handle business, support, etc. People who can do that are a dime a dozen.

Is this really true? I mean that as an honest question, because, while being a coder with a typical distaste for shallow marketing folks myself, I think these "business things" actually constitute work, if done right (first and foremost good user support).

I would imagine that there exists a similar comment in a board for marketing guys and gals, where they say:

> You want someone to program the database. People who can do that are a dime a dozen.

Pun intended.

You did a great job of taking the "feeling overwhelmed by possible choices" out and putting a lot of "Steve Jobs" in. Good work!

What does this have to do with Pied Piper (or the "Silicon Valley" show)? Am I missing something in the article?

I read the article for the same reason, but I assume he's referring to the original Pied Pipe of Hamlin (ie encouraging everybody to follow the lead)

It's suppose to relate to the original childrens story about the pied piper.

But I don't think the author wanted to kill the children with bitcoin.

The main difference being that the Homepage scaled much better, made it's creator a million dollars and had no physical counterpart product that had to be manufactured from a handcrafted original.

But otherwise, it's really "smaller" and "cheaper", I guess.

Could you elaborate on this? Do you mean CLI/UI?

Yes, I haven't used Mercurial too extensively (I use git), but Mercurial's commands make more sense to me. The only problem I have with it is that conflicts throw me into vim, and if I exit it to try and make sense of the merges, it thinks I'm done merging and leaves me in an unreasonable state, whereas git just marks the files and lets me resolve them at my leisure.

Using "hg help merge-tools" it describes some different merge tool settings that you might fine helpful. For example if you want it to merge all files it can, and mark the ones it can't fully merge you can try "internal:merge".

To set it for your user globally, in your .hgrc put "merge=internal:merge" under [ui].

Fantastic, thank you.

You probably need to disable a merge tool. Check 'hg showconfig merge-tools' and you'll probably find something. If this is on a debian derived system, I think that package maintainer turns on a bunch of stuff by default, so you may need to find a file in /etc/hg or similar.

Not that I use hg anymore, but if I remember correctly, exiting vim with :cq (returning an error code) solves that.

That's very interesting to know in general, thank you.

I feel Mercurial's commands are more intuitive than Git's, especially to former SVN users. Functionally, they're so similar it doesn't matter. This is why I love Kiln Harmony--I can work on a Git team and use Mercurial. Kind of like I can work on a dev team that uses Emacs while I use Vim. It shouldn't matter.

I work in a company that uses Git, plus Subversion for legacy stuff. I use Mercurial with hg-git and hgsubversion. There are occasional hiccups, but they mostly work like a charm. I'm happy because i get to use Mercurial, and my colleagues are happy because they have someone who can help them out by running complex revset queries!

Kiln Harmony was awesome, as I'm one of two developers in a team of eigth who prefers Git instead of Hg. Then we decided to use sub-repoes/submodules, and kiln harmony can't handle that, and our other team members simply WONT use git :(

I am totally with you on this, albeit kiln harmony is only available for managed hosting.

The main problem here seems to be: Why must every company on earth have its own Wikipedia page?

That said, I can see why e.g. Microsoft, the East India Trading Company and BMW should be recognized in an encyclopedia. And there are examples of products (lines) that could/should be mentioned in a vast online encyclopedia as well (e.g. Windows, BMW 3 series) because they influenced industries/trends/zeitgeist and/or lifes.

But why, for the love of god, should every consultancy, contractor, forrester and his second cousin have an entry on this site?

EDIT: typo

Because wikipedia long ago decided that 'notable' had a fairly low bar. There's really no going back now and personally I very much like the abundance of articles, even on relatively minor people/companies/events. The storage/serving costs for these articles is negligible, but the value to our society (and maybe especially future ones) will be enormous.

Some language versions have higher requirements for notability. It's hard to set a clear cutoff point for example in sports, entertainment and companies. When does something become wiki-notable? Everyone has their own admins, deletion policies and arbitration mechanisms, which have and will influence content.

Statistics show clearly that some have opted to include as many stubs as possible via the use of bots (for example Swedish wikipedia). Tens of thousands almost worthless stubs (like all US townships and communities) could be machine-added at any time, but most wikis have steered clear of this kind of doping. German wikipedia is quite the opposite in regards to pictures. They don't allow any fair use / citation pictures, which leads to de.wiki articles having considerably less photos than other languages.

What good are any of our acts if they aren't recorded for others to see? /s

> That would be a game changer on how I'd develop.

Why? I'm honestly curious since I can't imagine any big advantages over more "classic" setups ...

Go to any machine with a browser, log in, and have your dev environment pop up in the same state it was when you left it somewhere else, yet all running locally rather over some VNC connection or potentially laggy ssh connection. Log out, and have the state persisted.

I use a remote dev server that behaves exactly like this, except it's just a hosted virtual server. What advantage would doing this in JS give you?

I think Sun workstations did that in the 80s or 90s.

This seems like an urban legend to me, but your username made my day ;-)

"If we are not able to be alone, we will only know ... how to be lonely."

This counter-intuitive conclusion might be the most important statement in this video. It is not so much about technology being bad or social networks eroding our real connections to other human beings, but much more about losing the ability to be silent, thoughtful and ... well just be alone sometimes.

edit: typo