Beyond Panic, there’s even a surprisingly large community of Mac/iOS developers making their living selling “premium”software with traditional licensing models. Rogue Amoeba, Omnigroup, Flying Meat, along with a bunch of one to two person shops are still around. There’s fewer of them than there used to be (some bought some folded), and many of the bigger ones switched to subscription pricing (1Password), but they’re still out there doing their thing if you know where to look.
The current best practice is to keep the token in memory only and store a refresh token in an HTTP-only cookie.
In my experience though, if you’re only doing web-based auth and don’t _need_ to use JWTs for a specific reason, just use regular session cookies, it’s way less hassle. Coordinating auth and refresh state across page refreshes and tabs is a pain, and using a refresh token means you’re using cookies and saved session state anyway, so you lose pretty much all of the unique benefits of using JWTs and still have all the downsides.
Have you honestly heard any male colleague described as “too bitchy”? How did you listen to your female colleagues’ genuine experience of being unfairly labeled and come away from it thinking it was their fault? And the solution is “don’t be loyal and lie”? Sure you can probably get ahead doing that but yikes maybe it’s the system that’s the problem.
I’ve worked with a bunch of men who were considered ‘assholes’. Mean or difficult women are sometimes called bitches, mean or difficult men are sometimes called assholes. There is no practical difference between the two.
well one is allowed in a corporate setting and the other isn’t. that’s the main practical difference. i have literally sat in meetings where women are complaining about “old white assholes” in the industry (im not white) while my white male colleagues just look around uncomfortably.
amusing, as the competition doesn’t have the privilege of defining whose fault their circumstance is. adapt or exist in mediocre compensation, mediocre abilities to provide security to partners.
act like the competition. you aren’t going to get the satisfaction of an argument about the validity of everyone’s lived experiences.
figure it tf out and don’t worry about how it’s articulated in internet comments. otherwise, you’re probably not pulling your weight on the wage gap for your gender, yikes, because other people are.
Claims that there is no gender pay gap based on clearly biased sources irks me.
So firstly, you don’t know what the NYT tech guild analysis looked like, so why assume they didn’t control for other factors? It is plausible they could have, given their access to competent statisticians, but we don’t know either way. It seems like you may just want this story to fit your pre-existing narrative.
Secondly, there are so many high-quality studies out there better than an a blog post about a Forbes article about an interview from a conservative think tank that show the very real existence of a gender pay gap that _is not accounted for_ by fewer hours worked, experience, or job type (yes these do contribute but are far from the entire picture). Here’s a couple (read their citations for more):
Lastly, _even if_ womens’ “lifestyle choices” were to explain entirely the pay gap (which they don’t, see above), think about what kind of career choices you’d make if you had to constantly debate about your right to equal pay with your supposed peers.
It’s not really plausible that the NYT tech guild would have controlled for factors that would make the pay gap appear smaller, because their incentive isn’t to be truth-seeking, but to attain a superior negotiating position.
Wow I can only imagine how unwieldy that was to use. Was it just one big list by date published or did they did they try to order by title/author/publisher? Books in Print nowadays is tens of thousands of (mostly garbage) records monthly - I imagine the volume was a lot less back then, but still had to be a lot to sort through on paper.
As someone who has subscribed to Bowker’s Books in Print data for the last four years, I’d take any stats based on their data with a huge grain of salt. Bowker does issue ISBNs (and the BiP data has tens of millions of them), but they do very little validation, with their data largely input by publishers often long after the ISBN has been issued and with varying standards. For example, their attempt to identify overarching “works” (i.e. The Fellowship of the Ring as a literary work vs its various editions and reprintings) across ISBNs is unusably inaccurate, even for mainstream published titles.
Also as the article mentions, ISBNs are issued for all sorts of things most people would not consider a “book”, like journals (the kind you write in, not the academic kind), coloring books, sales displays, maps, bulk lots of books for schools, box sets, reprints of Wikipedia, calendars, etc and these are not always particularly well distinguished in their data because it’s seemingly up to the publisher to categorize it correctly, and some fly-by-night Wikipedia article reseller is just not going to put in accurate data.
Maybe Bowker has data they don’t include in BiP that would make their stats believable…but I kind of doubt it. LoC seems more reliable, but their corpus is (intentionally) much smaller and more focused, and generally the books libraries care about doesn’t 100% overlap with “all things published that most people would consider a book” since that’s not their purpose. OpenLibrary is doing good work in this space, but it’s still kinda early and struggles with data quality. It does ultimately depend how you on how you define a “book”, but for my money I’d say your numbers are low, though you’re spot on that only a very small fraction of those get widely read.
For US/UK/NZ/Aus/SA, ISBNs are granted through Bowker who does maintain their "Books In Print" data set that, in theory, contains metadata for all of the ISBNs they've granted. In practice though it's a mess. It's expensive to access and relies on publishers to enter in accurate and consistent metadata, which is...variable in quality to say the least. Often publishers buy blocks of ISBNs to use later so no metadata is entered up front and has to be pushed back to Bowker at a later date. To be somewhat fair to Bowker, the history of ISBNs far predates modern data standards and I can imagine wrangling publishers to get accurate data is a difficult task. But on the other hand, you'd think they'd have a lot to gain for doing it right. As someone who runs a book website, it is endlessly frustrating.
This is super cool! I actually have been working on a new book recommendation site (https://braincandy.com) that has a similar-ish (but much smaller scale) visualization for book similarity. It is really interesting how certain genres tend to be much more insular than others and it can be a real challenge to break out of genre boxes when making recommendations. There's so many books out there on the edges and in-betweens that get lost when they don't fit neatly into an existing popular genre, and those indeed can be some of the most interesting.
Like another commenter said, many people are willing to put up with a lot just to work in games, even in a low prestige role. Also the bar for support/QA jobs in pay and treatment is very low across pretty much every industry, so paying a decent wage and offering good benefits (plus annual vacation to Hawaii) is a big plus. That said, it’s still not great - the “flat” structure leads to a lot of really toxic power dynamics where those roles always end up at the bottom with no real agency or recognition.
I unfortunately also have had the experience of being pushed towards management, even though I'd say I have only slightly above average social skills. At a former job I was told I could be promoted to a senior software engineer in "3-4 years" (this was 8 years into my career after multiple years of "greatly exceeds expectations" reviews at this company) or I could become a manager. I held off for awhile since I had no real desire to manage, but I could talk to people and organize things so eventually that felt like my only way up. I did it for a year and hated it, then quit to be a technical founder at a startup, which is actually less stressful and way more enjoyable. I guess it worked out for me in the end (though I should have left way sooner), but I know I am not the only woman who had similar experiences at that company which makes me sad.
reply