OMG, it's just a 'sheepsfoot' blade shape (as TFA mentions, but doesn't emphasize enough, IMO). That's the kind of thing you would have seen in hardware store knife displays, or scouting manuals, when I was a kid. It IS a good shape for cutting hand-held fruit. Or for cutting round-ish objects NEAR the EDGE of a hard surface (like a cutting board). But it is a bad shape for cutting meat or hard vegetables on a plate. You want a decently curved blade for that latter use. Both for ergonomics, and to keep your fingers & wrist ABOVE the surface of the plate or raised rim. This is not rocket surgery...
As mentioned in TFA:
"Beyond form, there is function: Both Rich and Blease say their French knives keep their edge longer than other table knives, meaning they require far less frequent sharpening. Rich says he has replaced a few sets of steak knives, while his Lannier knives have been in action since 2018."
That's it. It's a cost-saving play by the restaurant (sharpening is time-consuming if your staff does it manually; and increasingly expensive if you out-source it to a sharpening service).
The stuff about the 'form', and the artisanal knife production is mostly PR for the restaurant.
Though I've heard of that knife-maker; and positive things about them. And the Thiers region is historically a major area for edged tools.
====
FWIW: I'm not a Chef; but I have a nephew who is; and I discuss restaurant knives and sharpening with him. But, more usefully, I'm a woodworker, and I have whole books just on sharpening, and tools from Thiers. Again, this is not rocket surgery, but hopefully one or two readers will be today's "lucky 10,000"!
Well, I’m much closer, at 66, to having to deal with the dreams and realities of retirement, than the (much?) younger author of TFA is. All that follows, BTW, is from a USA-centric perspective. (Immodest request: kindly refrain from saying how much better retirement and/or old-age is, in your country-such comparisons are largely unproductive; yet annoyingly tedious.)
I’m still working full time as a Software Developer and systems analyst, and largely by my own choice. Though I admit my lifestyle would be curtailed a bit (or maybe a LOT, if I live long enough!) if I had to live off my current savings plus whatever level of social security I’d be entitled to.
I’m still healthy enough to do the work, but I definitely feel like I don’t have the energy level and stamina that I used to. Nor as much motivation to focus on the job and my career.
Those last two challenges were most apparent during my previous two jobs, which were at software or hardware start-ups. I simply don’t want to deal with that level of stress and time pressure anymore, regardless of whether or not I can work at that pace. (Which is increasingly doubtful, admittedly.)
Currently I’m working at a sort of ‘biotech startup’ except we’re embedded inside a giant pharma company. And the work pace is wonderfully relaxed (and low-stress), compared to my previous employment (in high-tech startups). From my current viewpoint, and career needs, it’s a good match. I get a solid salary (+ bonus and stock), but (unlike software/internet/AI startups): a PHENOMENAL benefits plan. Though not FAANG money; but, then again, I never made that kind of money when I worked for Internet startup companies, so…
The good news, for my current career, is that I’m still mentally sharp enough to have, say, an in depth discussion of the differences between React, Vue, and other UI frameworks. And I’m teaching myself the finer points of TypeScript, as well as applying it on the job. The bad news, is that I’m having a serious of health issues. Nothing catastrophic so far; but gradually increasing in significance or frequency. At this point I feel like it’s a race between when my body gives out, or when I simply lose interest in writing code, and can convince myself that I’ve got enough savings to retire on.
Assuming that I can retire in reasonably OK health (if possible, in 3-4 years, around age 70, when I’d max-out social security benefits), I’m thinking that I have a low boredom threshold, and will want something to keep me engaged (and to help me maintain a healthy regular schedule). I’m not sure what that is yet. Maybe something just for fun (for example, I like to do woodworking)? Maybe something part-time, or freelance; but enough income to make my retirement less financially worrisome)? I’ve thought of: substitute teaching; being a teacher’s assistant (both at secondary education level; college adjunct faculty; sound or TV production; or maybe trying to sell some of my woodworking (which would make it a much less fun hobby, sadly)? Possibly an (off-season) estate caretaker gig?
I’d love to hear from others here, on HN, who are retired (or about to) and have: experience reports, cavests, or tips to convey. Or constructive feedback on my own retirement ideas…
Surprised that I haven’t seen anyone recommend or even mention implantable lens technology, for long-term vision correction (maybe I missed the mention). AFAIK, it’s reversible, and safer than laser surgery (LASIK, PRK, etc.)—-nota bene: I am not a doctor, and this is not medical advice.
Anecdotal, but I got lenses implanted in both eyes recently, after living with astigmatism, nearsightedness, and Rx glasses for many years. Very happy with the outcome—-now I can drive without any glasses at all! Well, I do wear sunglasses in the summer, as one does; but now I can wear whatever sunglasses strike my fancy—I’m no longer limited to using those annoying clip-on sunglasses, over my (former) Rx glasses.
I could have chosen a ‘progressive’ Rx for my implanted lenses. However, the surgeon would not provide, for my eyes, high assurance that I’d have crisp vision at both nearby and far distances. So, I chose to get implants that would let me drive legally without glasses; and also do most activities without glasses. For reading and computer use, I can use either: cheap ‘drugstore’ magnifying glasses, or Rx glasses for the same purposes. But definitely research those tradeoffs, and discuss with your doctor.
Is this statement backed by peer reviewed science? I could not find anything. When I Google for "safer than laser surgery", 100% of the results say that ICL (implantable contact lens) are riskier than laser (LASIK).
They probably just mean in terms of reversability; LASIK is obviously permanent, but ICL can be undone.
Both procedures are relatively low risk; each has their own set of drawbacks and qualifying conditions (eg - ICL isn't recommended for people who are over 45 years old).
45 years old is bizarre FDA restriction rationalizing that you might need lens replacement or +glasses soon anyway. Other countries don’t have this limit for ICL.
There are a lot of 45-year olds that won’t need RLE until 65, if ever. Why do they need to travel to Mexico to get ICL instead of doing it in US? Same thing with modern multi-focal RLE lenses. They got approved in US just couple years ago, and people used to go to Tijuana just to get access to them for years before that.
The flap created for LASIK (and LASIK-like surgeries, such as SMILE or LASEK) heals, but doesn't have the structural integrity that occurs when the epithelium has to fully regrow like for PRK. So that flap becomes a semi-permanent weakness that can be dislocated down the road and cause problems.
In general PRK is still considered the safest laser surgery option, but trades off the long-term risk of the epitheium flap for a much longer initial post-op recovery time. With PRK you have to be careful that there's no hazing as the epithelium regrows, but once it's regrown it's as good as it ever was. So for folks with a high risk of future eye injuries, PRK tends to be preferred (or required, in some instances like the special forces).
> I’m no longer limited to using those annoying clip-on sunglasses, over my (former) Rx glasses.
On the subject of clip-on sunglasses, nowadays some brands are offering prescription glasses that work with magnetic sunglasses covers. The sunglasses cover seats flush to the prescription glasses, and just make the package marginally thicker. They really look like you are using regular sunglasses when moutned on. I am also a contact lense user, specifically on days I might use cycling sunglasses, but those magnetic sunglasses are my goto solution for everyday use. Mine are from the Afflelou Magic collection.
The good thing with those magnetic sunglasses is they don't have arms so they take very little room in a pocket or a bag and they are inexpensive so you can keep spare everywhere: house, car, office, backpack...
The only downside I could find is when you are driving a motorbike you have to think about putting your helmet visor down before you reach a certain speed, around 55-60mph (might be lower on windy days) otherwise your sunglasses might fly away. The magnet is simply not strong enough. But my main helmet has its own internal sun visor
My surgeon was willing to do contact lens implants, but was very adamant that lasik was a more appropriate course of action. Despite being more than willing to pay the price premium. So I went with lasik, as recommended.
Unfortunately, that left me with all of the negative side effects (halos at night, dry eyes) I was hoping to avoid by choosing an implanted lens. While I don't regret getting lasik, hearing someone who had a successful ICL surgery makes me wish I had taken that route instead.
Who knows what your doc was thinking but I figure they knew more about you and your personal situation than a random hacker news commentor. Medicine often times has trade offs so there's a chance you'd regret lens implants in one way or another if anything financially. Anyways, hope your vision is good now.
I have ICLs and suffered from those too, along with other internal reflections at night. It will get better with age as your pupils get smaller, but it takes years.
As for ICLs don't be fooled by the marketing too much. I've read countless medical studies since having them and I'm reading about all sorts of increases in risks for eye issues. Btw dry eyes are a possibility too, as with any cut into the eye. Long-term studies are rare too, as 5 or 10 years is already considered long. I expect to live a lot longer than that.
Not to mention that while "reversible" is true, the procedure is not as easy as putting them in and you really don't want to take them out it unless you absolutely have to. It's a rather substantial cut they have to make to take the unfolded ICL out again.
I did ICL a few years ago, had a good experience. I did a fair amount of research. One interesting thing to note is that the FDA is often several years behind for both ICL and Laser tech (eg, it looks like the EVO/EVO+ (V4c, V5) lenses finally got approved in 2022 but was originally introduced in 2008 and approved in many other parts of the world in 2011. For lasers, Canadian lasers/TransPRK procedures generally seemed a generation or two better than what was being offered in the US as well).
While TransPRK (or LASIK) was an option for me, I decided to go with ICL:
* No flap or corneal ablation (so is still an option in the future, I suppose), just a 3mm incision that completely heals
* no eye dryness risk (corneal nerves not damaged); in general less reported complications post-surgery from my research. generally proper placement, and also making sure you have a good first week of recovery/good followup are the big things
* V4c/V5 (w/ KS-Aquaport) does not have fluid flow issue older gens did, and had a larger exit pupil hole (although my left eye even years later still has some haloing in low light due to it opening a bit bigger)
* the ICL can be removed or replaced in the future for upgrades or prescription changes
* ICL is an actual outpatient surgical procedure, is more expensive than most modern laser options and you should use an experienced/good surgeon. I went w/ Dr Kimiya Shimizu, one of the most experienced in the field (and is the KS in the KS-Aquaport, invented the injector technique as well). There are other Dr's as well who have done thousands of procedures, it's probably worth going for more experience. With proper insertion, he was actually able to use a regular (non-Toric) implant to correct for my slight astigmatism in both eyes.
Obviously, having work on your eyes is a serious thing, so I'd recommend everyone do their own research, but ICL for me was a big QoL improvement.
ICL is relatively new and is surprisingly little known. I learned about it by chance from friend, did it, and it worked out great, beyond any expectations. I see way better than with any glasses or contacts.
I went with “mono vision”, i.e. my eyes are preset for different distances - one for close, one for far. This takes some time to get use for, but I consider it more convenient for me as I get older. I wouldn’t recommend this setup for a younger person, obviously.
Anecdotal, but I've had multiple Physicians (Urologists, specifically) recommend Mate as an alternative to Coffee and Tea. Particularly for people who find that Coffee or Tea causes them excessive urination and/or poor sleep quality; or who want to reduce the amount of acid in their diet. Though, as a reminder, Mate does also have caffiene, which can cause excessive urination and/sleep problems all by itself, even in pure (i.e., pill) form...
FWIW, as a long-time resident in the north-east USA, I've seen mate increasingly available in large grocery stores (super markets); though not consistently. And often it's the pre-mixed 'canned mate' form -- whatever that stuff is; I've never tried it. But Mate is typically also available in ground leaf/powder form, in tea bags. And sometimes in bulk form. That's what I purchase.
Sadly, I've rarely encountered Mate in restaurants in the USA, even in ones which advertise a selection of high-quality teas. At best, I've seen it in independent tea rooms and coffee bars. No, NOT in StarPhucks--yucks: coffee so bitter--at least not any of the ones near me.
After trying several of the brands of Mate that my local grocery store carried, I (happily) settled on the products from the Mate Factor company, from Asheville, NC. (I have no connection with them, other than as a very satisfied customer.) I particularly like their 'Mocha Mint' flavor, hot, either by itself, or slighly sweetened. (Though I can taste the mint note, most definitely; the mocha part is: ehh?) I think the Chai flavor is also good, but may be more of an acquired taste. The Hibiscus Lime is also yummy (IMO); but may not be a good choice for those who gave up coffee or tea for mate on acidity grounds (that's not medical advice, and I'm not your doctor).
I'm going to attempt to give some fact- & data- based answers, as there seems to be too much ideological axe-grinding in (many of) the existing responses (as is, unfortunately typical on HN it seems, when discussing Front End Development). Even if my attempt seems...boring? (And sorry for the length; hopefully it makes up for that a bit in quality...?)
HN: "Why did Frontend development explode in complexity?"
Answers:
0) It's not ONE thing--it's a combination for forces/trends/factors...
1) The underlying technologies have become more complex (at least CSS and JavaScript have, but much less so w.r.t. HTML). For example: Flex layout, Grid layout, calc(), variables, etc., in CSS. Async/await, destructuring assignment, import(), optional chaining, spread operator, yield, ...more in JavaScript.
2) Customers and Users 'see' something that looks complex (whether inherently or accidentally), using Web technologies, so they are increasingly conditioned to expect that any application (regardless of complexity) can be build/delivered using Web technologies. A few examples, off the top of my head:
https://www.figma.com/https://docs.google.com/https://www.onshape.com/en/
3) HTML is--egregiously--impoverished! Quick, when was that last time you saw a non-trivial LOB application (or even most CRUD applications) that did NOT need some sort of data-grid style presentation? Well, luckily we have the HTML5 data grid control for that...oh wait, F** me! And then there's less common needs, like a 'tree control'. Or more common needs like: a robust dialog control (with proper focus mgmt., etc.). To PROPERLY implement (documented, rigorously tested, styleable, i18n support, accessibility support, DOM attributess, JS API exposure, and on and on) just one of those is weeks, even months of work. Sure, if you're only creating something for your own project, you can take short-cuts. But how much effort--and complexity--has been foisted, collectively, on Web application Developers, because the BROWSERS don't have a complete control set???
Arguably, the HTML control set is not much richer (except in styling) than what one could do on a 327X terminal; which is 1960s-vintage technology!
HN "Follow up question : Is that complexity necessary or artificially inflated?"
3) Short answer: YES.
Long answer: as the technologies mature (whether the built-in troika of HTML/CSS/JS; or the add-on stacks), and as Developers become more experienced at delivering applications with 'Web stacks', what I've experienced is that some of the accidental complexity is decreasing. But certainly FOMO and RDD, and similar self-serving imperatives are a factor in having artificial complexity. For example now that 'legacy' browsers are no longer a concern/constraint for many projects, the complexity of Babel, and Webpack are often no longer needed. Or, at worst, can be replaced by more: modern, simpler, and generally performant tools.
Also consider the madness which is the global namespace + cascade approach of CSS to selecting where/how styles get applied. There are (? were) benefits to this approach when CSS was exclusively being used for a relatively small number of styles that needed to be applied, consistently, to a large number of pages (i.e., via a rel link to a SHARED stylesheet). But those days are LONG gone! There have been numerous attempts to address that madness, traditionally via naming conventions, for example:
https://en.bem.info/methodology/naming-convention/https://www.keycdn.com/blog/oocss
But those approches are (IMO) tedious; and experience has shown they are not scalable, on multiple axes (application complexity, project longevity, team size, experience level diversity).
So Developers added tooling, such as SaSS, to attempt to overcome the weaknesses of CSS for large/complex projects. That's been at least a partial success. BUT, at the cost of additional complexity in the tooling and build chain. Maybe even having to have an additional language run-time for some tooling like that!
Just having two 'newish' features of CSS: variables, and the calc() operator can potentially reduce a lot of the traditional usage of things like SaSS. In some cases, the need for tools like that goes away completely! That's a win, for reducing artifical complexity.
Another example is the strict scoping of style selectors in Vue's single file components:
Just that one feature alone, completely eliminates the traditional CSS madness, but without the weakness of the conventions (like BEM and O-OCSS), and with minimal (and pre-configured/included) tooling.
CLOSING THOUGHTS: state management is still very complex; at least for non-trivial, and at least moderately interactive applications. In my experience (and I was designing, and implementing, complex GUIs _long_ before the Web was a thing), at least some of that state management is necessary (inherent), for those non-trivial & interaqctive applications. The best we can do is to research and investigate, and try-out various approaches to minimizing the _accidental_ complexity that our state management approach/library/etc. adds to the inherent complexity.
I'm somewhat adverse to making recommndations on specific technologies, but I'd suggest that Developers who are contemplating a Web applicatiion with demanding state managment needs take a look at the following state managment library:
Comment: it addresses a LOT of the pain points that many Web Developers/Projects encounter. Moreover, I've had some very positive experience with the predecessor project to this one (i.e., React Query). N.B. If you're going to be using: Vue, Svelte, or Solid.js (i.e., NOT React), then make sure to click on the drop-down menu in the UL corner of that page!
According to their compatability section (see: https://ruffle.rs/ then scroll down), it looks like, after years of work, that they're only up to supporting 10% of the AS3 language, and only 5% of the AS3-based API. Yeah, I don't think I'm going to be regretting all those expensive Flex development books that I recycled a while back.
Flash/Flex: it's not coming back, just let it fade away?
To answer your specific question re: "career prospects/lifestyle of UXR"; I used to do that work full-time, and even founded a consulting business around that. FWIW, I also chaired one of the largest local chapters of the relevant ACM special interest group (SIGCHI). However, I don't work in that field anymore, by choice. And I'm somewhat pessimistic about it, even though I still think it is a critical discipline. My reasons for leaving are:
-- Smaller companies can only afford one person, so they typically hire someone with an art school background; and expect that person to also be able to do UX work well. They are really distinct (but slightly overlapping) skill sets, so it is hard to find one person who is competent at both! Especially on a small company salary...
-- Personal to me: I don't have that art-school background, so that puts me out of contention for a lot of jobs.
-- Most 'tech' companies, from giants like Apple, to small start-ups don't seem to value high-quality UX work any more. At least not as much, and as generally, as was expected in the dot-com years. More typically, nowadays, they seem more interested in visual appeal, and being 'on trend'.
-- I've also heard that UX is not really important because new users are 'digital natives'.
-- I can make a LOT more money, and find more jobs, slinging web front-end code (Vue/React/JS/TS/etc.), than I can doing UX work.
While I have a creative background (previous life as a Local 600 cameraman on features/commercials/music videos/etc, father was a design professor) - I am not an illustrator or designer by experience.
If I make a jump, I would aim for tech in some capacity (UX/UXR, Sales, PM are current focal points), but between now and June - I’m just gathering information.
I'm going to have to say that I'm generally, but only _partially_ in agreement with your list of examples. When talking about "best designs", I would definitely (but respectfully) disagree with the inclusion of StackOverflow, and GitHub. Specifically:
StackOverflow
Issues: mind-boggling bad layout (poor visual hierarchy, no clear organizing principle); inconsistent typography; too many fonts; weak affordances for useful functionality (filtering/sorting replies); hard to tell obsolete or ancient replies from newer ones
GitHub
Issues: quasi-random screen layout; hard-to-discover functionality; mystery-meat navigation; low-level behavior/affordance inconsistencies. (Editorial aside: this looks like the side-effect--or result(!), of a slavish application of an agile feature development model to the UI design of an application.)
I concur with the suggestion elsewhere on this page to try ToastMasters (though I think you should really try to commit to at least the introductory sequence, to get good value out of it).
I also concur with the advice that dealing with social interactions is like muscle training: you need to do it repeatedly, and semi-regularly. And also, yes, it may be a little painful at first; and may feel very artificial--that's OK. A good place to practice: in a grocery store line, with whomever is behind you; and possibly with the checker, if they don't look stressed already.
I didn't see MeetUps mentioned already, but I've found them great. That's because they give the participants something to do/think about/focus on; when the conversation might drag, or otherwise be awkward. Do note that going to MeetUps with, ahem, possibly an unusually high population of introverts might NOT be a great idea. In other words, don't expect to practice your social skills so much at, say, a 'New Features in TypeScript' meetup; but one devoted to, say, fresh-water canoeing might be better (yes that's nearly stereotyping, but roll with it, please...).
Lastly, a great way to socialize, in a low-stress environment, is contra-dancing (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contra_dance). If you're not familiar, it's a dance form that is VERY approachable for the most un-coordinated among us. And live music, with just a nominal cover charge, typically. BTW, they usually have a mini-class at the beginning of each dance. But there are only about a dozen moves, and most of them are pretty basic (especially if you've done any square dancing or ballroom dancing before--but contra dancing is easier to learn). Typically there's a mid-dance break, which is a great time to practice socializing. Also, people usually change partners after each individual dance, so you get to meet lots of folks. (But don't expect to take anyone home that night--it's the _opposite_ of a 'meat market'; and you will not be welcomed back if you're too aggresive...) There are dances in pretty much every state in the USA, and some outside the USA; though there are the most in the North East USA. Caveat: most dances were shut down completely due to COVID-19 and are just starting up again.
As mentioned in TFA: "Beyond form, there is function: Both Rich and Blease say their French knives keep their edge longer than other table knives, meaning they require far less frequent sharpening. Rich says he has replaced a few sets of steak knives, while his Lannier knives have been in action since 2018."
That's it. It's a cost-saving play by the restaurant (sharpening is time-consuming if your staff does it manually; and increasingly expensive if you out-source it to a sharpening service).
The stuff about the 'form', and the artisanal knife production is mostly PR for the restaurant.
Though I've heard of that knife-maker; and positive things about them. And the Thiers region is historically a major area for edged tools.
==== FWIW: I'm not a Chef; but I have a nephew who is; and I discuss restaurant knives and sharpening with him. But, more usefully, I'm a woodworker, and I have whole books just on sharpening, and tools from Thiers. Again, this is not rocket surgery, but hopefully one or two readers will be today's "lucky 10,000"!
==== ETA: grammar fix.