Jay Desai has FOMU. No, you read that right. As a first-time founder and CEO of health technology startup PatientPing, he’s got a healthy fear of messing up. This anxiety especially bubbles to the surface when it has to do with his team — now over 100 employees — and particularly the seven who report directly to him. He’s seen too many immensely talented and productive teams stall because of a subtle misunderstanding on how to best work with each other. After consecutive year-long searches for his Head of Product and Head of Operations, he didn’t want to squander that investment because he couldn’t figure out how to work with them.

DRM's Dead Canary: How We Just Lost the Web, What We Learned from It, and What We Need to Do Next
By Cory Doctorow
November 27, 2017

EFF has been fighting against DRM and the laws behind it for a decade and a half, intervening in the US Broadcast Flag, the UN Broadcasting Treaty, the European DVB CPCM standard, the W3C EME standard and many other skirmishes, battles and even wars over the years. With that long history behind us, there are two things we want you to know about DRM:

• Everybody on the inside secretly knows that DRM technology is irrelevant, but DRM law is everything; and
• The reason companies want DRM has nothing to do with copyright.

These two points have just been demonstrated in a messy, drawn-out fight over the standardization of DRM in browsers, and since we threw a lot of blood and treasure at that fight, one thing we hope to salvage is an object lesson that will drive these two points home and provide a roadmap for the future of DRM fighting.

Dans un article précédent, nous avons vu comment l’approche DDD, via la définition et l’utilisation d’un Ubiquitous Language et d’un véritable modèle du domaine, peut faciliter la communication entre acteurs projet, aider à l’écriture d’un code plus expressif (et donc plus maintenable), et capable d’adresser la complexité – et les changements – du métier.

Aujourd’hui, nous allons essayer de répondre à certaines questions laissées en suspens par notre première approche de DDD. Comment éviter de multiplier les couches de mapping, sans valeur ajoutée, à différents niveaux de notre architecture ? Comment aller plus loin dans le respect des principes objet tels que l’encapsulation ? Comment faciliter la réalisation d’IHM orientées tâches et activités, présentant des informations vraiment pertinentes pour l’utilisateur ? L’utilisation d’un modèle objet riche est-elle synonyme de dégradation des performances ?

Suite à un imprévu, votre voiture sans chauffeur pilotée par un algorithme, a le choix entre se jeter du haut d’une falaise et entraîner la mort de ses occupants ou percuter ce bus scolaire transportant 50 enfants, l’envoyant au bas de la même falaise. Quel choix fera-t-elle ? Serai-je au courant, en y embarquant le matin, de l’existence de ce choix ? Aurai-je la possibilité de le désactiver ? Ce problème, et l’ensemble de ses variantes, est connu sous le nom du « dilemme du tramway ».

In 1965, I. J. Good described for the first time the notion of “intelligence explosion”, as it relates to artificial intelligence (AI):

Let an ultraintelligent machine be defined as a machine that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man however clever. Since the design of machines is one of these intellectual activities, an ultraintelligent machine could design even better machines; there would then unquestionably be an “intelligence explosion,” and the intelligence of man would be left far behind. Thus the first ultraintelligent machine is the last invention that man need ever make, provided that the machine is docile enough to tell us how to keep it under control.

Programmers seem to have forgotten the real purpose of software, that is to solve a real-world problem.

50 years ago, in 1968, the Working Conference on Software Engineering was held, sponsored by the NATO Science Committee. People started to notice software was becoming a fundamental part of society at that time. However, it was also becoming too hard to understand. After that conference, programming started to become a whole industry. It started to move away from the control of business people.