Most designers use Macs, sure. But just giving a link to product owners, QA, clients, and developers is a whole lot easier than trying to get them to successfully use Zeplin or manually keep track of what static images I've copy/pasted in tickets etc.

Also: I use Mac at work and PC at home. So now you know one designer who uses Figma on PC.

Zeplin is just a link too.

That's what we've been using quite successfully for GUI apps development: designers work in sketch, everyone else consumes the result through Zeplin.

I do really love Zeplin, and I use it at work since my company prefers Sketch over Figma. It's great if you have to use Sketch.

You can use Figma + Zeplin. Maybe have your designer export a design to Zeplin and see if you have the same issues inspecting elements there as well.

It's most likely that your designer just has a messy file. I've never had an issue with the Figma inspector.

I've never used Sketch Runner, but you can search assets in Figma which appears to be 90% of what you're looking for.

1 minute of searching also reveals a plugin called "Figma Walker" which, as the name implies, is an attempt to copy the exact functionality of Sketch Runner.

> “Maine's decision to impose unique burdens on ISPs' speech—while ignoring the online and offline businesses that have and use the very same information and for the same and similar purposes as ISPs—represents discrimination between similarly situated speakers that is impermissible under the First Amendment,” the lawsuit claimed.

I agree. The law should apply to everyone, not just ISPs.

Haha yep. It's lovely when the filer of the lawsuit raises a great point on how to throw out their case and further citizen protection, isn't it?

In general I feel that developers are very poor clients. Designers are better off finding freelance work or donating time to a non-profit they care about imo.

I agree, Slack replies are awful. The only chat reply feature I've ever enjoyed was Flowdock's. It doesn't create threads it just connects replies with colors. It's great.

Your hypothetical either assumes that machines will never be able to be plumbers/doctors/yoga instructors, OR just takes a snapshot of some point in time between now and the eventual future when machines are superior at all work currently done by humans.

The former is incredibly short sighted and the latter doesn't seem super productive to me.

Do you have the robots today? Do you see them happening by the time the next government rolls around and UBI becomes a real choice?

As a reminder, suffering the problems of UBI for just a few years without an actual, functional, non-vaporeware solution in place is going to ruin a lot of lives and quite possibly burn down all our existing shit.

> Robert Skidelsky wrote that fears of technological unemployment were not so much wrong as premature: “Sooner or later, we will run out of jobs.”

You're arguing timeline when that's not what the article is about. A world without work is our likely future, and it's worth talking about.

The context matters. Seen the democrat primary speeches? UBI is on the table. There's people in this thread right now advocating for it. The article is indirectly advocating for it. The whole thing is like advocating we drive 200mph over a bridge that hasn't been built yet.

In 2010 this was a reasonable position. Predicting the current absurdity that is Facebook data collection and sales would have been quite the hot take in 2010.

Correct, Contentful is a CMS.

Question for you though: why would you want product/marketing people feebly attempting to create new pages/layouts with some tool when you could just have a React engineer code up whatever they design with ease? I mean I get it, graphic designers and business analysts are cheaper than engineers, but if it takes them 2-3x as long (or more) to do the same job are you really saving any money?

Thanks for taking the time @comis, this is a valid question.

My assumptions are the following:

1. Dev cost is not only the time spent by the Dev team but, planning, project management, back and forth between tech and the different stakeholders. On top of that, you can add deployment cost, QA, etc...

2. Miss-opportunity cost, I feel like there is a trade-off between developing core features and supporting features (marketing, sales static pages) and that on a competitive market, most of the time, supporting features are not being prioritized due to a lack of tech resource.

3. Finally, small initiatives have a huge overhead for marketing and sales teams, if adding a drop-down to a form requires to create a ticket, ask the product team to spec it, design it, and add it to a Sprint,... Then, the drop-down will probably seat there until it becomes a critical issue or until it can be bundled with other small tickets. Which might never happen...

This is basically to avoid all of this that I'm looking for a CMS to embed in our existing site.

Thanks,

When I was a kid I remember using Server Side Includes (.shtml) to achieve this. It's how I ran my "blog" before blogs were common.

No clue if anybody still does this, but it worked great in 2001.