Very Rust focused, still it's an interesting debate. It gives a good overview of the different types of lock behaviors in case of failures. It's very much advocating for the poisoning approach which is indeed an interesting one (coming with its own tradeoffs of course).

This is a good way to see that the architecture questions are multi-layered. And yes, in enterprise contexts they go all the way to the company strategy level.

I agree with most of the points here. They make all the difference. The audio is too often underestimated.

An old one and a bit all over the place. Still, plenty of interesting advice and insights.

Shows that you don't always need to put stuff in Box to get dynamic dispatch.

Another illustration of how to use a new type to declare intent for display of values.

IDEs allowing to spawn actions in the user environment are still a big security risk.

Some areas of our industry are more prone to the "fashion of the day" madness than others. Still there's indeed some potential decay in what we learn, what matters is finding and focusing on what will last.

A bit too high on the "positive caricature scale" to my taste. That said there's a kernel of truth there, focusing on the developer experience will lead to improved impact.

Or why it's important to mentor others and not stay in your own bubble.

This needs repeating but yes, quality matters in test code too.