This sounds like the inevitable slow death of RN to me. Web developers simply moving on to new tech that's better/more common on the web while RN languishes as the massive set of open source libraries required are abandoned
Don't confuse HN bleeding edge hipser tech with the real world. The world of react-alternatives is fragmented and lib-incomplete, React still gets more installed than its most popular rivals combined[1].
I have worked across these frameworks and React is the only one where I find the lib ecosystem satisfiyingly large (and still growing most steadily).
+1, this system should be improved with a topic based subscription so individuals can opt-in/out of lower level alerts, but keep the ability for local governments to blast everyone in an area for emergencies
Reliable and fast push notifications from trusted accounts are the critical piece of infrastructure that needs a public option. Something less than the existing emergency alert systems that allows for individuals to subscribe to and is easier for local governments to onboard to.
What I don't understand is why the VFX industry doesn't follow market dynamics and pay the artists what they are worth given the talent shortage. Or maybe they are and that story isn't getting told?
Wages only go up when employees refuse to work for less.
Sadly, people who work in video games and movies are some of the most overworked and underpaid professionals relative to the value they provide because they have been socialized to see themselves as artists who are "doing what they love" so it's about "more than the money". Which allows studios to exploit them, because for the studios it is very much about the money.
If game developers were just as willing to work for FAANG then conditions would improve for them overnight. Same as if VFX artists were willing to do mobile app UX design. But as long as they stick to only their passion, they fail to exert any financial pressure to improve wages or working conditions.
Passion-based industries don't ever follow proper "market dynamics", video game programmers are paid less because there's always someone else who will take the job at a lesser rate because they are passionate about it. You try to pay less for a CRM developer and they will just find another gig while you won't find anyone as qualified because that job doesn't have a motivation outside of the monetary transaction for the labour.
Market dynamics is just a model, as with any model it doesn't fit reality perfectly, it breaks down at the edges.
It can be argued that it is a market dynamic, and (if you were to somehow control for everything else) the difference between the pay of an game programming job and an average white-collar boring office programming job is the market's value of that passion.
That comparison may coldly boil down something people feel very deeply about, but I'd also argue the market is already doing that.
Is that the market really breaking down at the edges, or fitting perfectly?
I your examples of the video game programmers being paid less, it is because their compensation is in two parts: the money and the pleasure, astisfaction of passion, & the prestige of working on video games. In contrast, working on a CRM project has no other pleasures nor prestige, so those companies must may more dollars.
Seems the difference in [pleasure, passion, & prestige] could even be quantifiable by measuring the paycheck differences?
> Passion-based industries don't ever follow proper "market dynamics", video game programmers are paid less because there's always someone else who will take the job at a lesser rate because they are passionate about it.
Hammer hits nail on head, bulls eye. I've been a graphics programmer for 45 years, from research in the early 80's, through 3D video games, and years of Academy Award VFX studio work. It is the passion: making the media that captivates imaginations, and an ever visible stream of new applicants whose work looks really appealing - so you better shine or you'll be replaced.
The employee/employer power dynamics are clearly very different than in e.g. software engineering:
> A clause in Angell’s contract reportedly required him to pay a £30,000 penalty should he quit in the middle of a project.
I can't imagine anyone signing that kind of contract in tech.
Employees probably have less bargaining power than in tech, since the skills aren't as transferrable. The employers are just contractors being squeezed by the studios both on cost and on extra work, and pass that squeeze onto the employees. And since the VFX houses aren't the ones making the profits on the final movie, running a VFX studio and trying to get the best people (and best product) by promising better conditions doesn't actually work.
> In 2014, three visual effects artists launched a class action lawsuit alleging that between 2004 and 2010, numerous big studios – including Disney, Pixar, Lucasfilm, DreamWorks Animation, and Sony Pictures – had colluded in setting salary limits and avoiding hiring artists from other studios. (The studios settled the case without admitting liability, paying out a combined £140 million settlement.)
My guess is that the “gig” nature of animation jobs disadvantages workers because they’re constantly needing to look for the next gig, which makes the hiring process a race to the bottom. The lack of job stability increases the likelihood that workers will accept less-than-favorable terms. We see this in game dev, and more recently, the Hollywood writers strike.
It's like game devs and pilots - a cool job lots of kids wanted to do growing up, so there's a glut of new talent eager to be used up and burned out for pennies.
I share the sentiment. It was my wife's (then girlfriend's) explicit wish that I don't chase my passions in such an environment, and I'm really grateful for that after the years.
It's probably also the case that (not so well-paying) passion jobs become less interesting when they're your full-time, perhaps long hours, job and you don't really control what you work on. I was pretty passionate about photography once upon a time but I realized (correctly) that I'd probably end up doing photography for some small-time newspaper (when those still existed), some organization's public relations, or commercial photography--and not Life Magazine.
Market dynamics only works that way in employer/employee relationships if the workers push for it enough. From the ealrier discussion someone linked to above: “The elephant in the room here is that VFX, unlike many other film professions, isn’t properly unionised” – this may play into the situation. It may also/instead be that a lot of VFX work is done (once you get down to the individual workers) in short term contracts, a bit like the “gig economy” situations seen in other industries, which seems to easily create a barrier for worker protections.
React Native follows this pattern by moving most JS processing off the main thread allowing scrolling and other input to happen without blocking for a response from the JS VM. However this does end up causing a lot of problems with text input and gestures as now you have a sync issue between the threads, if you get caught processing a bunch of stuff in the JS thread the app may appear to be responsive with scrolling but nothing happens in response to button taps or text insertion. It is the only way RN was going to work on lower end hardware though so probably is the right solution if you assume running react everywhere is a good idea.
Yes, making GUIs responsive isn't as simple as just "don't run stuff on the UI thread". There are good reasons to run stuff there even if you're going to hang up the app for a brief period, namely, the user won't see partial/incorrect updates like non-syntax highlighted text or incorrectly clipped shapes, and - especially important - it means you can't end up with invalid GUI states like the user pressing a button that does X and then immediately pressing another button that does the opposite of X, where you should have disabled the other button but didn't get to it in time. Web apps have this sort of problem if they aren't using enough JS, and it can cause all kinds of weird bugs and errors.
The reality is that moving things off the UI thread is always a calculated engineering decision. It can be worth it, but it complicates the code and should only be done if there's a realistic chance of the user noticing.
Columns are LWW (last writer wins) registers within rows which are LWW maps. When concurrent writes occur because peers may not be communicating, there is typically an arbitrary but convergent selection based on peer id.
* More generally, frameworks like RN and Flutter are a good choice if your app doesn't need extensive/precise/efficient access to native platform features and a bad choice if it does
+1, if you only ever do superficial platform features RN isn't a problem. However if you want to implement the platform features, like Widgets, Siri/Shortcuts support, Apple Watch support, Spotlight search integration now you're going to start having to maintain extensive bridges to communicate between native and JS.
