ianleeclark

Elixir has had dialyzer + type hints for years

The point in my career at which I used jq the most was when I was doing a lot of work with Elasticsearch doing exploratory work on indexed data and search results. Doing things such as trying to figure out what sort of values `key` might have, grabbing ids returned, etc.

Second to this, I've mostly used jq to look at OpenAPI/swagger files, again just doing one-off tasks, such as listing all api routes, listing similarly named schemas, etc.

From what I've seen in the companies I've worked for, this is fairly consistent, but naturally I can't speak for everyone's use-cases. At the end of the day, I don't think most people use jq in places where readable or maintainable would be most appropriate.

I installed spacemacs 5ish years ago and have added maybe 20 lines to my configuration since then. None in the past 4 years. It's really overstated the amount of maintenance that Emacs requires.

As does a neurotypical person with enough sense not to say such a thing, yet harbors the same opinion.

So your white collar friends are going to sit and enjoy life while the good times roll but flee the second hard times come.

Seems reasonable. Why would anyone want to spend their last moments bleeding out from avoidable violence?

If I had a friend that only came over for a BBQ and couldn't be bothered to help me in a time of need, that isn't a friend

For many people the modern relation with the state can be mediated through nationalistic fervor or through comparison of services provided. You seem to see it through the former, so you'll need to exercise some empathy to see the latter.

The U.S. has invested trillions of dollars building an infrastructure that has led its citizens to being some of the best-educated and most-productive in the world.

Remember what you said: some of the population is capable of doing such things, but a relatively large portion of the population are doing gig work. The distinction isn't "why take the highly skilled segment of the workforce and retrain them," but instead "why not take the 'low-skilled' portion and upskill them." Ultimately we know the answer, but your framing was off.

And to me, it reminds me of home. It probably depends where you've spent most of your time in the country.

I don't see anyone saying to use jQuery for highly interactive applications.

I don't know what to tell you. The first sentence in my comment was a quote and the rest of the comment was responding to say how that quote was misunderstanding the OP.

I never said anyone specifically said to do that, but that, in the metaphor that the OP made, a static website isn't an accurate comparison to a AAA game.

what's so wrong about sprinkling some jquery on a static website

You're talking past one another. He's speaking in the context of AAA games, and the equivalent of that in the webdev world is a highly interactive application.

Alas, that won't happen until tech workers (and white collar workers in general) realize they're workers and not capital owners.

Workers though they may be, it is within reach for most programmers to jump on the real estate ladder, heavily invest, and retire comfortably.

That's the only way you get some negotiating power.

For the duration of this bull market, Software Jobs have been easy to come by. Negotiating power, while never completely in employees favor, has given most programmers the chance to live _far more comfortable lives than anyone else they know or went to school with_.

That's what your message is up against.

"Of mice and men," "to kill a mockingbird," "brave new world," "scary stories to tell in the dark," a scattering of biographies from Lucille Ball to Cesar Chavez. That's certainly a lot of cultural heritage to cast aside

The fact that they don't make those tradeoffs means that no matter what comes out their mouth, they don't want to pay the price of that feature.

The feature may be worth it to a large swath of people, but not at a price-point that producers are capable of offering _for whatever reason_. By applying scale, costs can be reduced, and the feature can come to a more friendly price point which might increase demand.

There's another angle to this which is reduction of externalities, as well, but it's never as clear cut as: caveman spend sea shells on log rather than spending sea shells on rock.

Discussions have different levels of "safe" viewpoints

You don't have viewpoints, you have cosplays. If you had viewpoints, you'd stick by them. Instead you get to have your cake and eat it: post whatever catches your fancy that particular week and then pretend to be on the posters version of the underground railroad.

How so?

You're calling for repression while avoiding responsibility for what you post. Specifically you're calling for nationality-based repression which would affect people who haven't lived in the country for decades or had no meaningful input.

You're just feigning a petty tyrant.

Can you link to your LinkedIn or other personally identifiable information?

My handle isn't some random assortment of characters and if you Google my name, you will find it all.

What's your solution to what's going on in Ukraine?

I'm just some idiot with a keyboard, who cares what my opinion is?

Theres something deeply funny about hiding behind a throwaway account while saying that anyone Russian by means of passport ought to be repressed. Cowardly display

But I don't agree that it should only be people that go to war that should discuss or decide whether we should go to war.

If someone is pro war, they should see their convictions through.

But don't worry: you don't need convictions here on the internet. You can just impotently post, make all the insinuations you want, and then go back to Netflix. The internet is great because you don't have to actually do the hard work of following a belief through, and can instead adopt styles of posting while they're relevant.

Right now, we're showing him that we won't attack him militarily no matter his actions

Out of curiosity have you volunteered to fight in Ukraine? They're taking volunteers.

it seems like this further exactrebates it. I put together a weekend project to see how it goes, I have a bug somewhere I didn't think of now BAM I'm on the hook for millions of dollars in "damages."

Judging by the CCC statement, this is more intended for cases of negligence in face of known security problems. It specifically says "unkorrigierten oder gehäuften IT-Sicherheitsproblemen" (uncorrected or accumulating/amassed it security problems).

If their tips don't put them over minimum wage their employer is required to make up the difference.

You'll get your hours cut if you try this.

If social media is going to be the default communication medium

I don't think this is really true. Most people in the US don't use Twitter. Not to mention that many users are following entertainment based users or aren't fully consuming posts by those they follow.

Twitter is just an additional stream/supplement to town halls, email lists, websites, news coverage, etc.

No, it's not fair to say that someone who took no part in some crimes is in any way complicit in said crimes because they have differing opinions on how justice ought to be handled.

Again I would suggest not to try and do an 18th century version or the minority report.

If you're really so high-strung about innocent people being murdered, you might want to figure out some way to stop paying taxes.

He is also the son of Weather Underground terrorists

Probably not a good idea to blame a child for the activities of their parents. Makes one seem a bit deranged whenever they start arguing that blood carries criminal behaviors.

Why shame them in "get a life" if all they want to do is to socialize a bit at work where they spend so much time.

The people who don't want to socialize at work will find themselves being socialized with. I understand the feeling somewhat, and I imagine a lot of others might, as well. Everyone's had situations where they've felt compelled to feign friendliness with others who they had no interest speaking with.

The mistel barocco is an option. You can even combine the two sides of the keyboard without noticing that it could be seperable.

A bit OT, but how does 4x10 work for developers? I feel like realistically no one can write code for 8 hours a day anyway, so what does a 10 hour day look like?

I've been doing it for nearly 4 years, and it works great for me. The third day of rest is worth its weight in gold, and, on the very rare occasion I do a normal 5x8, I always feel much more drained when I come back.

From a work perspective, I can do 10 hour days of coding without too much of a hassle, but I have a lot of things that pull me away from it: lunch, drink breaks, standup, 1-2 hours a day for meetings (sometimes more, usually lower-bounded), writing documentation, doing code reviews, responding to queries on slack, doing some git archaeology, etc. There's a lot more to the job than just writing code.

The moral claims I make are innately true to all individuals.

You need to convince me and ethicists, first because I could introduce you to some error theorists who would say otherwise. It's literal he-said, she-said with people choosing to believe what they want to believe in. Whether they base this in the categorical imperative or the bible.

To make it 100% clear what point I'm trying to make is this: you can't just make a normative statement or that your morals are globally valid. When you do so, you say X ought do Y. So you need to prove that "ought". Why ought X do Y? And what makes that normative claim applicable outside X?

You can pretend that government has the right to do that which you cannot do to another individual, but you would be wrong.

I was never interested in doing so, just in saying that anything you consider to be a moral fact isn't verified.

You can do what you like as long as you are not harming another.

Andrey Chikatilo would expand this a bit. So would Dahmer.

The answer in reverse, is that government does not have greater rights than individuals. It does not determine morality.

Morality is a rough one. Most people who study ethics and metaethics do follow moral realist positions, but positions under that umbrella are manifold. When you look outside of moral realist positions, there are even more positions.

So, the government doesn't govern morality, but even the people who study it can't form consensus.

Governments can of course write laws to justify whatever they like, but these laws themselves need to align with morality to be 'right'.

Your problem isn't with rights or governmental egregores, it's with an inability to reconcile a morality with the turtles-all-the-way-down-esque social relations that summon said egregores.

Until your moral claims can said to be true, then my rights could contradict yours, and it might not be reconcilable. Here someone smarter than me might even consider that the job of government is to reconcile the infinite, inconsistent beliefs, and to give some basis of "rights."

Basically, they just don't want their brand Doom to be associated with the band "progressive thrash metal" music

Very funny given the various metal genres that have been used in doom games.

Unless you were talking about anything after my first paragraph, I'm literally just quoting wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment#Relation_to...