HN user
I hate ads, but you're actually right in this case. If done with moderation and purpose—like the YouTube videos that promote a high-quality cooking ingredient while meaningfully explaining why it’s better—it could work well.
From a consumer’s perspective, paying for a product or service is an exchange of money for value. Even with a service, there’s a tangible result—like a fresh haircut or the convenience of not dealing with tax filing. Paying only makes sense when there’s value in return, which isn’t true for many subscription services. Arguments about “maintenance costs” hold little weight for customers who don’t perceive any added value.
In some cases, subscriptions are reasonable, such as when software would be a heavy burden on personal devices, like power-intensive language models, or when it needs to stay compliant with evolving legal requirements, like an accounting software or something.
A larger issue is Apple’s push for subscription-based software in almost everything, often to bolster its bottom line, while damaging the industry as a whole for the reasons mentioned.
Also subscription to a developer is a product for them, it has nothing to do with the product they create for others
well said, this makes zero sense to be a subscription service
The solution for this could be creating a review process and gamify that too
It's baffling that people can still think this way in 2024. Almost none of Musk's forecasts, estimates, or product promises have been delivered on time. His history is basically a long list of missed deadlines. Believing that Musk is a good leader is pure delusion, especially now.
i checked them, but libredirect removed the twitter option from the config menu (i guess because of the changes in the twitter api) and the other just a generic url to url redirect. but thanks anyway
I think the more correct statement would be: "The world is moving away from imperative programming altogether, towards declarative programming".
IMO functional programming is just a special kind of imperative programming. I think real distinction is between "imperative/functional", where you describe how to do thing, and "declarative" where you don't care about the hows, but you specify what is the end result you want to see. For example: html (declarative) "I WANT A RECTANGLE AT THIS POSITION AND SIZE": <div style="top, left, height, width">, while imperative, you exactly tell the how, like <for i> then <for j> draw a pixel at that position i,j. Making drawing a box as functional does not make too much sense, because that is a task, which does not benefit from the functional paradigm, but it does helps a lot with cardinality and null checking problems when dealing with other kind of problems.
I think it is already changing into this. Basically every single framework is one kind of declarative wrapper over an imperative language, or you can say every single function library makes the way how you work a little bit more declarative (like in the box drawing demo, you can just use function to write a box. I think in 20-30 years, in a very twisted way programming will be completely declarative by you telling an AI to write a code, first at a very low level of abstraction, but in time more and more complex ways. We'll see
thanks, maybe that will become something later, but i am looking for an browser extension that doing the work for me
i'm with you, i used to use nitter with the firefox extension, but it seems to be dying, is there any alternative?
Watching the matrix reloaded for the 10th time, and seeing the actors appear in two places
Nope, it's not a compression artifact, those white braid guys are actually twins!
(jk)
yay, acquisition, consolidation, monopolization, yay
welcome to the warner family, bro
not, if the Copenhagen interpretation is right
if you like Atomic Rocket, check out Orion's Arm:
It's about painting future timeline for humanity that goes on for eons
well, we used to like them, but then the fantastic "long shelf life" variations came...
so no winner then?
hungarian chimes in, the words mentioned in the article in hungarian:
tea - tea (different pronunciation) pineapple - ananász orange - narancs taxi - taxi (slightly different pronunciation) tomato - paradicsom
now let's look at the article's champions coffee - kávé chocolate - csokoládé
both the same origin, but distorted so much, that i could not order those things in starbucks...
so in my books, taxi is the winner
A prospective buyer is coming, you say? Hmm, let's park the F40 exactly next to the gate accidentally.
There are lot of think could be done not to pay $12 delivery fee over a $20 order. For example, the cost of delivering a $100 order is pretty close to a cost of a $10 dollar order. This could be used for subsidizing the cheaper delivery cost by the more expensive ones, like saying delivery fee is 25% of the order and no tip, but minimum $5 (or something). So you pay $5 for a $10, $5 for a $20, and $25 for a $100 delivery, which is way easier to swallow. But this is just one of the most primitive ideas to handle that, the point is the make companies to figure out what is feasible, instead of letting them run rampant with whatever shady sh*t they can come up with.
This case I don't understand the sentence: "This was a dumb way to spend my Saturday." What else you could do there?
Good products hardly ever take out on their own
The direct reason for this is the existence of advertisement. In a ideal (also pretty much only theoretical) world where there are no ads, only honest reviewers and comparison sites, bad products would fall pretty quickly, planned obsolesce would be suicide etc etc.
No matter where you live, the subway elevators always pull double duty as restrooms, and I've never stepped into one without feeling that pungent scent of urine. But hey, you're absolutely right, the subway is just peachy.
It appears that modern internet companies fail to understand that a "brand megaphone" is not a desirable product for anyone, except brands of course. The internet is sick now.
best development since chatgpt came out :D
SVG: Draw rectangles and triangles. If you don't have a script tag in it, totally declarative
I totally agree. It is declarative the same way how HTML is.
I don't see how SQL and SVG is similar from the viewpoint of approaching the problem. In SVG you concretely define what you want, and that is happening. In SQL you don't define the data you get, like ok, this cell will be 5, another will 8. I understand what you want to say, I just see those completely different ways.
can be combined, can be filtered, and all without a single function or loop in sight
This is the key here, because this is exactly true to functional programming.
Compare SQL->LINQ->lambda expression
If they work the how you say, then
SQL - declarative
LINQ - declarative and functional the same time
Lambda exp - functional
This idea is completely nonsensical for me
Thank you for actually listening and trying to communicate with me, instead of just shooting ad-lib responses like "it's in the textbook so that is that".
I don't really have an aim, I just made a simple statement, and after that everything is back and forth. Classification of languages has no practical implication (or not too much), what it changes is how they are taught, like "INTRO TO PROGRAMMING 101 BEGINNER CLASS FOR DUMMIES"
I suppose to some degree, everything is debatable.
I just wanted to say that i dont think it's important to decide if HTML is an actual programming language or not, I see it as a language that defines something for a computer. We can just put all alikes into the "Markup-not-programming-language" basket, and that invalidates all of my arguments. I feel in this case there is no big difference in functional/imperative vs declarative languages assuming most of the people's different-than-mine classification, so why even bother then?
neither of these statements will be absolutes - there are situations and times where a declarative language user will worry about how the query planner will execute, and there are times where an imperative language user will write very much declarative code.
That's right, in practice everything is more like a mishmash of everything. Your function library could be seen as a declarative language over the top of a generic language.
Imperative: following and executing a cooking recipe
Functional: being multiple line cooks, the food is transformed step by step by different cook, they do the same thing on multiple half-ready dishes.
Declarative: giving your order to the waiter and having the food returned to you fully prepared <-your definition BUT you need to have a restaurant to do this, for other cases, not necessarily (you can line cook at home if you really want...)
SQL: getting elements of the a set and by DOING different kind of transformations (line cooks) and removing some plates (a guy standing there and if he sees a plate, which is a different dish, he tossed it to the trash). The end result is the set of data you want.
Ergo SQL is a functional language.
I never meant "free of computation", I actually mentioned a lot that forget computers and softwares, and focus on languages.
<script> is Javascript, not html (I mean what's inside), they just smashed together.
specifies an specific output
That specific output definition is really different.
Consider this:
-task: give me even numbers
-imperative approach:
for i=1 to 100
result += i * 2
-functional approach
return [1,2,3,...].select(x=x * 2)
-declarative approach (not possible, but for the sake of example)
EVEN NUMBERS = NUMBERS LIKE 2,4,6 AND CARRY ON <-this requires a framework, which understand every word i wrote there.
What i wanna ask you to re-explain these examples with your understanding of classification, but using the same task.
Reality is that declarative languages would be little more than file formats without access to computation.
That what HTML is. A declarative language and a file which requires a framework.
Your earlier example of SELECT (1+3); is something that can be done in HTML (many different ways), too.
No, not with strictly sticking to the standard and not use any trickery. HTML was not designed to do any kind of calculation. That's why javascript came later.
Oh, man, you opened my floodgates pretty well. I feel I have to mention that everything I write is my opinion, and not absolute truth. I reject the idea of absolute truths anyway.
That textbook example was just about how our understanding improves over time, and how a textbook, or all of them is not absolute truth, and debatable, which is what I am doing exactly.
SQL describes WHAT data you want returned. A functional language describes HOW you retrieve that data.
You need to phrase more precisely here, HOW and WHAT could be interpreted by your own way.
SQL is a declarative DSL for set theory and data transformation.
Yes, exactly. Now think about lamdba expression added to a generic imperative languages. Isn't that doing the same thing? A set, transform and filter elements of the set like how you do it in SQL with record, but in this case with objects of classes? Are lamdba expressions functional or declarative? Is LINQ functional or declarative? If you say SQL is declarative, than those should be too, or am I wrong? Or LINQ is declarative, but lambda expressions are functional?
Also precisely why both OO and FP languages fail
I disagree. OOP failed because most programmers did not understand it. I would argue if they are failed, but now I just go with your premise, and assume they are failing. I see the real reason behind this is multifaceted, and mostly coming from the stupidity of design patterns, software architects making too much money in big companies, so they have to deliver something, so creating overconvoluted abstractions, think about the java enterprise hell. Not understanding why restricting yourself as a programmer actually benefits you in the long term, and helps other people understand your sh*t, because it forces you to be more organized. But instead of this, we have classes with a million interface slapped on it. Just ask the average programmer what is a difference between an interface and an abstract class (or have they used it ever), maybe they gonna ask what is an abstract class.
Functional languages are not failing. Pure ones created for certain purposes, like experiment (proof of concept), scientific use, etc and their ideas make their way into all the popular imperative languages, like javascript or c#, where are really useful tools while not caring about the pristine philosophy behind them, just a really useful tool.
database mapping libraries
I also would not bury them. I exactly know what are you speaking about when you mention "impedance mismatch". I actually wrote my own mapper, i dont dare showing the code to anyone, it's just a mess, and the performance is horrible, but instead "mapping out the database and showing them as object" I built it for forcing the OOP ideas into the database level, so you can have e.g. inheritance. And not how MS solved this in entity framework like by basically denormalizing the structure and smahing together the data, no, my code exactly knows which tables to go to put together one object, which can have multiple level of inheritance. I also introduced the OOP ideas of aggregates and composites, which is exactly my attempt to solve the impedance mismatch problem you mentioned before. Correct me if we don't speak about the same thing.
You speak about technical details of SQL server internal processes, I approach this question strictly from theoretical standpoint, analyzing the language itself, and categorizing them, without thinking of computers. The problem solving approach is my divide, not anything about implementation. I wrote about this a lot in other comments.