This comments reads sarcastic, but it makes a serious point. GoDaddy has an extremely poor reputation. At some point you must accept that choosing companies like that is your own mistake.
the thing is that it makes sense when you are small, and it's one of the hardest and riskiest things to change, so it's a decision that stays with you.
And to be completely honest, it isn't that bad, you get a phone you can call 24/7. Of course mistakes happen and staff can't always help, but it's more like a 99.9% vs 99.99% quality thing when comparing to other providers like AWS or CloudFlare.
Namecheap looks really bad if someone does some due diligence and the word 'cheap' comes out, it's unproffessional and signals cheapness of materials.
Porkbun I'm not familiar, but it for sure can be a better option, it's just that when people start out they look for a familiar name rather than the marginally best option.
I just said it makes sense, not that it's the best option. It's just fine if you are a small or even medium business.
This is at the very least debatable. The site they took down contained multiple videos of animals being tortured and killed. Not all decisions are simple black and white.
Animals die too in a genocide. I don't understand your point here. Namecheap decided they should proactively police Namecheap customers for this, Namecheap should lose all its business as a result. Let Namecheap decide whether the income from Israel exceeds the income from all Namecheap customers.
Because the horror of dahl’s adult stories are as pervasive even if knowing the ending. I reread many times and still get the same sense of impending doom barbarically twisting fates in the mind - what if it was true?
You are overthinking it. It is neither a strategy nor keystroke saving (although technically with shift its 4 keystrokes as opposed to 5 for Linux and quite a few saved for Windows). I just typed that without thinking probably because it looks better and reads a bit easier (subjectively).
> Your company has figured out the perfect arrangement. You’re good at your job, and you don’t cause problems. Your manager knows they can count on you. From the company’s perspective, this is the ideal state. Why would they change anything?
Whish I had knew this earlier in my career. I worked for IBM. I was very good at delivering usable software for internal use. They kept me there forever. They would give me awards and such, but never a change as the author says. If I needed something, I had to do it myself.
reply