I too use intellij and neovim for everything and agree mostly, but what's your motivation to check out new editors? Is it for just for fun? In my mind an editor is one of those things I wouldn't consider changing unless the alternative is heavily funded and leagues much better than my current choice.
I try new stuff regularly. People can build cool stuff. Google is releasing a new IDE soon. I'll try it. Cursor.so is a cool idea. I tried it. Zed sounds great (I love high performance) so I tried it. Haven't switched yet though!
But I was 100% vim for years and over time, slowly started using intellij and friends. I hated how slow it felt. But as I learned the features, it became a no-brainer.
If I didn't try new stuff I wouldn't have used it.
I did the same thing with terminals for a while, and settled on Kitty. (I'd never use fig / warp). Speaking of which, IntelliJ 2024 EAP terminal is horrific. I had to downgrade.
I always wondered if he went back because he hoped to use his popularity after surviving the poisoning attempt to stir up enough chaos and somehow get into power. He probably felt if he even had a 5% chance he had to take it. Him being a narcissistic opportunistic politician makes a lot more sense to me than some heroic figure who risked his life for the Russian people.
American news media is all about the narratives and they love heroes and martyrs. I imagine in the next couple of weeks this guy will be turned into the Russian MLK of some kind, some comment here already made the comparison. It's just unreal how blatantly manipulative the whole thing is.
Only a moron would consider the distinction material. Is Carlo Rovelli a theoretical physicist or a philosopher of physics. He would say "both" and would probably say that the two disciplines cannot be pursued independently. Was Ernst Mach, whose interests extended well beyond physics but whose basic philosophical questions about relationalism produced general relativity, count as a scientist, a physicist, or a philosopher? All three. What about Julian Barbour, head of the shape dynamics research program and noteworthy independent scientist, who is inspired by Mach to elaborate on purely relational theories of gravity? What about Terrance Deacon, whose (flawed by comprehensive) book on the distinction between living and non-living systems is probably the most cogent analysis of the subject I've ever read? Definitely a philosopher, but also clearly working on entirely physical material. What about Scott Aaronson? I could go on and on listing people who work in both physics and philosophy departments.
The idea that "philosophers" don't think about reality is just absurd. There are thousands of philosophers thinking directly about reality.
I experience it, Imran Khan is former Cricket player and cricket worldcup winning captain he certainly give the big fight. Still not losing. Trust me he made Pakistani politics more entertaining than Netflix.
Come on, you say it as if every board member is an android focused only on short term results. They've had a board when Eric was CEO and Google was doing it's best work as well.
It's not really about the board, Google has become a mature company that's not going to grow 20% YoY anymore and this is what happens to such businesses. Unless they're lead by an exceptionally strong person who can stand up to economic forces, they will turn them into IBM.
Not agreeing with OP, boards don't always focus on immediate results and CEOs aren't androids that just care about pleasing the board. The world is rarely that simplistic.
If you have some ambition and desire to work hard, large parts of Google were already wrong places to be in 2010-11.
I went in bright eyed, excited about the challenging work I would get to do, but instead found inept co-workers happy to do minimal amount of work while enjoying the perks and chilling most of the time. Couple that with the undeserved air of smugness many co-workers carried and the cult-like social environment... it was already not a great place to be, at the very least the team I was part of.
Yeah, it's quite productive in a counter intuitive way, not having a ton of features just removes a lot of tiny decisions you have to make in a richer language.
