2 years ago I moved to SF from a shithole city. I had taken off like 3 years to work on my own projects. It was more difficult than I expected to find a job without any connections. Took about 3 months after moving here.
I think there's at least some bias against people who have taken time off because they appear comfortable not having a job and therefore the company has less leverage over them.
I think the bigger bias at play is the just-world fallacy. Employers assume that everyone who is unemployed must be unemployed justly because something is wrong with them (e.g. they're incompetent, slackers, toxic, etc.). That's the problem my friend had: the company that eventually hired him admitted they spent a long time trying to figure out what was wrong with him, even though they liked him.
You scatter the code all over the place, making it harder to understand and less flexible (less flexible, because if you want to change something, now you have to change it in six places).
Best practice doesn't mean "make as many classes as possible" although I would probably break up two-pages into a few different functions (large functions, even when they are good code, invite programmers who come later to add to them in a messy way).
If you have to change it in six places it just means that you did something wrong. Keeping those six places in the single file is not the solution either: next time you will need something similar, but not exactly the same you will copy that file. And next you will find yourself changing twelve places.
The good rule of thumb is not to refactor into reusable parts unless you need to do something similar. It isn't hard, at that point, to split things up. Premature design is like premature optimization -- you do the wrong things, or things you never need to do.
And yes changing things in six places means you did something wrong, but that's easy to do when you start by splitting things into six places. The worst, of course, is when developers don't change it when it needs to be changed and instead just keep adding. Once you have something so designed it makes removing and changing code more painful than adding code.
We definitely have some dependency cruft that could be trimmed (lots of relocated copies of Guava due to incompatibilities, for example).
We do frequent production deploys (of individual services, there's no such thing as deploying our entire application). To give an idea, it's a little before 1pm here and across our team there have been 180 production deploys already today.
I work remotely in SF. I live here because I like not owning a car, walking and biking most places, and non-tech things to do. I'm just lucky I can afford it. The solution is to build more good US cities that aren't car centric. I'm not aware of any. Build a from scratch city with a target of at least 250k residents on the California coast and I'll move.
I don't know how many people think similarly, but there's still a lot of non-tech people in SF.
The best way i've seen this framed is: in all of the US, there are only about 2,000 blocks of housing with sufficient density & walkable services to support car free living. This is some of the most sought after and expensive real estate in the country, but zoning codes won't allow more of it to be built.
Example zoning restrictions: mandatory building setbacks, mandatory parking requirements, mandatory building separations, maximum units per building, 1 or 2 story maximum heights, high minimum lot sizes.
Note: a significant % of those 2,000 blocks are in San Francisco.
Poorly recalling from my memory. Given that a "block" is a variable metric, the actual number is less important than the concept that it is a static. There are only ~5 cities in the US with > 1,000 of these blocks: NYC, Boston, DC, SF, Chicago (Philadelphia?, Baltimore?)* AND with a transportation network that makes car-free living possible. Developers would build more such areas if zoning allowed.
* Forgive my ignorance for being from the West Coast. Even in SF its difficult to live car free if you don't live on BART or Muni Metro.
As somebody who lives in Portland it still seems very much "car centric". There are some people who are able to get along without a car. There are others who can commute via bus or bike.
But it's really difficult to get around without a car. What sucks is that the city is making it more difficult to get around by limiting the number of cars on streets (Glisan, Division, heading into town on Burnside, soon Foster) without providing much in the way of alternatives. Buses aren't running more often and they don't have protected right-of-ways that would let get around traffic jams.
I'll agree that what they're doing on NE Broadway, protecting bicyclists, looks good. But they're doing it that very rarely.
Most of these lose on weather, culture or proximity to the ocean for me.
All of SF isn't easy car free, but I live downtown. SF could have significantly better mass transit. In order to get completely car free in my lifetime would probably require opt in to a new city due to people who have jobs related to things that should be removed.
NYC is too dense and the main prominent industries appear to be wall Street, advertising, and fashion which are not things I like. Car traffic is also pretty horrible.
You can easily extend that across the river to Arlington, VA. There's extensive public transportation. Cycling is taken seriously. Maybe the City of Alexandria, too; but, not the "Alexandria" part of Fairfax.
>> The solution is to build more good US cities that aren't car centric. I'm not aware of any.
NYC is definitely not car-centric or even car-friendly. Indeed, the non-car-centric zone there is considerably larger than SF's. Other cities like Washington DC and Boston are not too different so long as you don't venture too far from downtown.
The weather and people there are crap if you're used to the west coast. Winters suck and the rudeness of NYC people is insufferable in the long run for me.
Seattle? Downtown maybe. The east side (across Lake Washington) is very suburban, and not particularly suited to car-free living. I lived there car-less for a couple of summers and got into alarmingly good shape biking up and down the eastside hills.
