This is exactly how I feel about my programming work in this credentialist United States. I will keep programming, in spite of the haters -- who will stop me?
I build internal web applications for companies in the transport industry, and I have considered to try out Phoenix LiveView for my next project ( I have never used Phoenix or Elixir). Everyone praises the DX but I'm conserned about the requirement of constant internet connection. What happens if a user enters a tunnel where there are no connection? Will the app just crash or are there ways to handle this better somehow?
> I want a scientific mission to mars I hope doing so pushes science and engineering know how forward.
I encourage you to implement this mission. No one is stopping you. I hope you succeed.
> Going to mars on a larger scale is presently nonsense
The history of humanity at every scale is men saying "x project is nonsense" while other men do stuff (I recall my grandfather telling me how he was told that building a 5 acre dairy farm in the middle of nowhere, with no roads and no technology was impossible and would bankrupt him. That farm eventually scaled up to a "larger scale" that he was assured was impossible).
You really are terribly boring, or terribly young, or both. Sad.
Here's the thing: you bore me. I feel no inclination to engage with your dull diatribe. I'm the wrong audience for you, and you're a waste of my time, as I am a waste of yours.
So, find someone who cares about or agrees with what you're saying and you'll have a more productive debate, I promise.
The same as what everyone has meant, including the article. The naive solution is to simply write out every query you need, but that starts to become difficult to maintain once you have more than a small handful of queries. More realistically you are going to want to introduce composition in a practical setting.
The SQL solution is views, but they are complicated by being dependent on runtime state. There is a lot of complexity involved in ensuring that everything is in the right state. While that may be a decent tradeoff for some applications, the types of applications that lean on these query builders tend to be of the type where they are trying to prove a business hypothesis and whatever gets there the fastest is the tradeoff that needs to be made. A set of functions in the application language that somewhat resemble SQL, which output a SQL query, are a lot easier to implement than a system that manages view state.
The alternative is to compose queries at "compile time". In the simplest case you might get away with string concatenation, but this quickly becomes error prone at scale. While many languages of this nature are designed such that all concatenations are valid for this very reason, SQL is not. An innocuous and perfectly valid modification to one query can easily invalidate what was a previously valid concatenation. More realistically you are going to want to build an AST so that properties can be modified without reliance on exacting syntax. You can parse SQL to give you that AST, or you can go back to the aforementioned set of functions to generate the AST. The latter is considerably easier to implement.
Each approach has pluses and minus. As with anything, you have to pick your tradeoffs. But it is no surprise that a lot of developers choose the easy tradeoff, especially when a lot of those developers are developing systems where what is easy/fast is the most important tradeoff, not knowing if what they are writing will ever get used. Theoretical engineering perfection is moot if there is no customer.
You are right, I stand corrected - I think both approaches make sense for spreading change.
Yours on an every day basis, the viewpoint I gave requires opportunity, but matters too.
The thing with game theory, is it’s the right way to think of social structures that scale.
I think a lot of people’s behavior responds strongly to their incentives. All those people you (and I) are cynical about.
And ethics really are the positive sum “games”. Keeping one’s word, safety nets, helping our neighbors, win-win transactions and relationships - we adopt them as individuals for the immediate good it does, for us and who we interact with. And knowing if everyone did that we would all be better off. Even the self-isolating rich since society as a whole would run better.
Bottom up or top down encouragement are both with it.
The person who is you exist independently of any copy of yourself. While a replica of you would exist there would still be the original you manifest in your brain that would exist an independent life and die at some point without ever “resuming” in another body. This is similar to how you can never time travel yourself even through relativity. Your perception of time will be the same no matter what relativistic effects occur outside of your frame of reference. You will live your life span and die.
Your replica however would have a different experience and be able to draw on your memories etc. But you yourself will in fact live a natural life with no shared experience with your replica and will experience death no matter what. It’ll be little solace to you that a copy got to live your life after your passing.
Really? That's your only criteria for thinking it's absurd? People need food to live, water too, and also clothing. Is it absolutely insane that all of these cost money?
I'm not defending the insane billing system of the U.S, because it truly is designed to be or at least accidentally off the wall with absurdities, but it's not ridiculous to charge people reasonably for many complex, expensive things that also require hiring specialist assistance. Somewhere down the line, somebody in any case needs to pay for it via money and time.
I am from an eastern society, So my first day in western society I saw a blue collar worker clean up his food crumbs on a REWE deli table. This might seem normal to do for you, but I swear I never seen anything like that in my life in the eastern society. I was 27 this had profound impact on me than reading any book, I still remember it after a decade.
It's pretty standard practice for all cameras manufacturers to use a basic incremental filename. Many more useful data are embedded in jpeg exif metadata.
On the contrary including a date in the filename could be perceived as user hostile because none of the multiple iso representations (or non iso) is universally used and understood by the general public.
Eg : 20241112, 1112024, 1211024, 131208, 081213 and so on...
At the rate it's going, IPv6 should be ready for prime time around the same time we have nuclear fusion power plants and real self-driving cars that don't rely on a human driver.
I love that the view count is included in the minimalist UI. I came across one with zero views, and there's something so intimate and exciting about being the first person to watch an ancient home video (even if it's shaky handycam footage of a horse, narrated in Russian).
As an aside, hats off to Google to being able to serve an 11 year old video with no noticeable delay from what must be the coldest of caches.
If a 21 century rocketry group takes 20 years to reach the Karman line, college students or not, they are the definition of incompetent. Maybe they should all get internships at the United Launch Alliance; good for lapping out of the gravy train and not much else.
This opinion article lacks appropriate backing for the narrative pushed to be compelling, the data they reference is not included or linked, and the article suggests that non-enforcement of antitrust is the driver for food deserts which started around the 1980s with Reagan, when in fact there were an awful lot of issues going on simultaneously in that time period economically speaking.
It's usually ill-advised to propose a magic bullet when there are many factors at play in the overall economics. I haven't seen any data suggesting the unenforcement (which has no visibility) was more impactful than the S&L crisis (which happened around the same time).
1973 to 1982 Stagflation raged. 1970s took the USD into fiat currency,early 1980s the collapse of Silver occurred due to bad actors cornering markets, certain banks also started being less responsible with whom they loaned to favoring large corporations over independent businesses, and heavy speculation regardless of risk that culminated in the savings and loan crisis affecting many industries, and seemingly following the all too familiar pattern of too-big-to-fail bailout type plans, which were proven to be profitable starting with the Pennsylvania Railroad bankruptcy in 1970 (from what I've seen).
While it is an interesting synopsis, the article completely ignores the other factors instead cherrypicking antitrust, more specifically the Patman Act and unenforcement as the culprit. Economies don't operate in a vacuum. Occam's razor says its more likely to be any number of the crises that happened with the underlying trend being fiat banking, than any other factor that has almost no visibility with a lot of other confounding data. They were chaotic times.
Quoting John Emanuel Banuelos, “I’m the one in the video with the gun right here” indicating the moment he fired it into the air twice. Three trials proved guns without so clear a confession.
By the way, I dislike the term “compiler compiler”, because that’s not really what it does. I like “parser generator” for tax/bison, and “lexer generator” for flex.
I mean it literally. 3 year olds literally do not have the brain development required for empathy and will literally kick you in the head one moment and ask you for a sandwich the next
