- > They focus on objects when we should focus on morphisms.
if you're building real systems you should focus on both.
> Coupling as Hom-Set Size ... The second interface is easier to implement, test, mock, and evolve.
i would doubt that. this just hides the complexity of multiple interfaces inside single, more general interfaces. if those "arrows" actually exist you will have to test and evolve them anyway, and adding some extra classification level does little apart from adding complexity.
> Pipelines ... Why This Matters ... Testability: Each morphism can be tested independently
i agree ... and this just contradicts the previous point about hom-set size.
> The arrows are what matter.
everything matters. i'm aware of the benefits and appeal of category theory, but i don't see the need to shoehorn it into everything, this just seems an example of evangelization of extremes. iow: if your only tool is a hammer everything looks like a nail, and that's not conducing to good design.
- funny no mention about the texas instruments explorer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_Explorer
i barely got to play with one for a few hours during an "ai" course, so i didn't really figure much of it out but ... oh yeah, it was "cool"! also way-way-way over my budget. i then kept an eye for a while on the atari transputer workstation but no luck, it never really took off.
anyway, i find this article quite out of place. what hordes of romantically spoiled lisp machine nostalgia fanatics harassed this poor guy to the extreme that he had to go on this (pretty pointless) disparaging spree?
- that's a bit misleading. it was based on webcore which apple had forked from khtml. however google found apple's addition to be a drag and i think very little of it (if anything at all, besides the khtml foundation) survived "the great cleanup" and rewrite that became blink. so actually webkit was a just transitional phase that led to a dead end and it is more accurate to say that blink is based on khtml.
- agile is a mixed bag with some quite good ideas and practices, but imo the main selling point for industry is that it allows complete dillution of compromise and responsibility, and it shows. this is why companies have bought en masse into the snakeoil and imo that's the main reason for quality problems: follow these rituals (without any regard to the core concepts behind them) and everything will be fine, and if it doesn't it was not our fault, "change is inevitable and shit happens".
also, qa is simply not optional, and agile actually stresses that pretty strongly.
- thanks for this, you made my day! i never bothered to look.
i still remember when tables were forced out of fashion by hordes of angry div believers! they became anathema and instantly made you a pariah. the arguments were very passionate but never made any sense to me: the preaching was separating structure from presentation, mostly to enable semantics, and then semantics became all swamped with presentation so you could get those damned divs aligned in a sensible way :-)
just don't use (or abuse) them for layout but tables still seem to me the most straightforward way to render, well, tabular content.
- then there's the fact that this post (posted only 25 minutes ago) doesn't appear anymore on the news feed (albeit there being older postings with less upvotes), which shows me how much i can trust this site ...
then again i would admit that this news is kind of off-topic here, but still ... there's a difference between moderation and outright censorship. in the land of the free! i wonder if all these paid buffoons realize how poisonous this is and that it is backfiring.
- > Of course if your knowledge of HTML standards is great and Button exactly fits your current use-case you probably will use it
i would have imagined that coding html should be done by people with basic understanding of it, at the bare minumum to know what a button is. but maybe that's just me being old and not going on with the vibes ... maybe i'm just going to facepalm a bit and get some fresh air.
- it is, but i'm willing to compromise. grapheneos can be an option for a while, ultimately a linux phone. worst case i can settle with 2 phones for a while, one cheap/old stock android exclusively for the bank and such, another one for everything else.
it's also a long run, the way things are shaping up i don't expect alternatives to become mainstream but nevertheless getting improved support over time.
if we indeed end up in a situation where there is no viable alternative then screw that, i might as well go completely off grid.
- >You have the right to install whatever you want on your computer, regardless of whether that computer is on your desk or in your pocket. That's a hill I'll die on. I'm dismayed to see that this sentiment is not more widespread in this of all communities.
agreed, but i'm not going to die on any hill. i don't see much point in this discussion, these corps will do whatever they like. for me it is simple: iphone never was an option precisely because of this reason, and i've been quite content with android, but i don't think my current smartphone will run android for much longer, and the next one will definitely not.
- apropos of that: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2549
- >I paid money for this book >I can only read it in Amazon's broken app >I can't download it >I can't back it up >I don't actually own it >Amazon can delete it whenever they want
good that you didn't read the terms of amazon's kindle business model before buying that book; all that delicious rage and the interesting knowledge it spurred would have been lost to the world. tbh, i would have expected them to be more sophisticated. good job and kudos, enjoy your well earned book, it's yours now!
sadly i have no use for this, the only few books i ever bought on amazon were paperback, used and in good condition. good deals. but the mere fact that a provider requires me to use specific software to access content is simply unacceptable, making a detailed reading of their absurdly dystopian terms and conditions unnecessary.
i use amazon prime. for me it's very worth it just for the delivery savings as i live in a remote area. it includes access to their video streaming service. one day i decided to try it just to see what was there. i was immediately prompted with a download for some mandatory viewer/drm/codec. not going to happen, baby, so i just closed the tab, never bothered with it again and have the feeling that nothing of value was lost.
- >clear links for an evolutionary path
there are clear links for at least 2 evolutionary paths: bird brain architecture is very different from that of mammals and some are among the smartest species on the planet. they have sophisticated language and social relationships, they can deceive (meaning they can put themselves inside another's mind and act accordingly), they solve problems and they invent and engineer tools for specific purposes and use them to that effect. give them time and these bitches might even become our new overlords (if we're still around, that is).
- it is an assumption backed by considerable evidence. creationism otoh is an assumption backed by superstition an phantasizing, or could you point to at least some evidence.
besides, spirituality is not a "component", it's a property emergent from brain structure and function, which is basically purely a physical machine.
- indeed, but they're not talking about your phone, they're talking about android, which is something you don't buy nor own, you buy a license to use it on the provider's terms.
linux phones can't come soon enough ...
your point about the termn "sideloading" is spot on, though. perverting the language is the first step of manipulation: installing software is "sideloading", sharing files is "piracy", legitimate resistance is "terrorism", genocide is "right to defend oneself" ...
- reducing complexity is important but is hardly the fundamental reason to choose between server side or client side rendering or state management. that just depends on the nature of the problem and the context it has to be solved in. sometimes it doesn't matter, then you have a choice.
you guys are furiously arguing (and not really listening) about this or that hammer being good enough to treat every problem as a nail, like ssr was the "holy hammer". well, it isn't and not every problem is a nail, and while datastar looks excellent to me i simply would have no use for it if i needed client side logic or state for whatever reason.
- like a glance at the menu wasn't enough ...
btw, i just now did glance at the menu online, i had no idea that this crap i wouldn't dare to call food (unless i were starving) is currently selling in spain. this is a tiny bit depressing but was actually to be expected, and i stand by my statement :-)
- there are indeed monster packages but you should ask yourself if you need them at all, because if you really do there is no way around performing nr1. you get the code, you own it. you propagate malware by negligence, you're finished as a sw engineer. simple as that.
personally i keep dependencies at a minimum and are very picky with them, partly because of nr1, but as a general principle. of course if people happily suck in entire trees without supervision just to print ansi colors on the terminal or, as in this case, use fancy aliases for colors then bad things are bound to happen. (tbf tinycolor has one single devDependency, shim-deno-test, which only requires typescript. that should be manageable)
i'll grant you that the js ecosystem is special, partly because the business has traditionally reinforced the notion of it being accessory, superficial and not "serious" development. well, that's just naivety, it is as critical a component as any other. ideally you should even have a security department vetting the dependencies for you.
- npm in itself isn't special at all, maybe the userbase is but that's irrelevant because the mitigation is pretty easy and 99.9999% effective, works for every package manager and boils down to:
1- thoroughly and fully analyze any dependency tree you plan to include 2- immediately freeze all its versions 3- never update without very good reason or without repeating 1 and 2
in other words: simply be professional, face logical consequences if you aren't. if you think one package manager is "safer" than others because magic reasons odds are you'll find out the hard way sooner or later.
- books will be around for a while.
but i wouldn't mind getting back to the internet of the 80/90s where you could easily find more genuine content and less aggregators, replicators, marketeers and clickfarms. if that's "killing the internet" then it couldn't happen soon enough (i guess marketeers will not go away no matter what, that's a given).
the fear of decline of original content doesn't seem serious. much of what there is now is endless regurgitation anyway. while most of the free stuff nowadays is indeed just noise, the most valuable, original and quality stuff is free, has always been, and it's there. people have been contributing interesting stuff for multiple reasons and in multiple ways for decades, and still do; it is just buried under tons of rubbish. i see no reason why they would stop. if anything, a less noisy internet could be an incentive, and if gaps in knowledge form that will be even more reason to share and contribute, and things like stackoverflow will come back once llms become obsolete enough.
- > The Internet itself is decentralized, which made it extremely resilient. So is democracy.
extremely? i wouldn't bet on that.
how do you even measure that? books have been around for over a millenium, that's quite resilient. the internet is barely 50 years old. empires have lasted for thousands of years, modern democracies are a bit over a couple of centuries ... young. how do you determine their resilience? i see quite concerning signs of degradation lately, and they might have something to do with that iron law of oligarchy.
> The article cites a few notable counterexamples like Wikipedia.
no, it doesn't? it has a section titled "examples and exceptions", but it doesn't include any real exception (that has been resilient to this day), let alone a 'counterexample'.
> Your post looks like learned helplessness.
yours looks like wishful thinking (and difficulty in parsing the wikipedia)
white on dark grey with phosphor green around? not really.