I totally agree. The internet is where people live now and there is no "commons", no "public square". This is where people get so irritated with private companies that own all the space and decide how we interact. The internet is a libertarian dystopia. Things like "free speech" would apply on public social media platforms. If this idea were ever to come to fruition it would probably need to start at the local scale and focus on local political issues.
do you know the long term success rate though? I've lost over 50 pounds and kept it off for a couple of years, but my body eventually went back to it's normal weight.
Isn't existentialism the cure for nihilism? It doesn't matter to the universe, but it matters to ME. I exist. From this we are left with the heavy burden of deciding what we think is good and bad, right and wrong.
I disagree that copyright is a natural right. It is a right that societies bestow to creators to incentive them to create. It has not valid purpose beyond that and is quite unnatural to me.Part of the problem with today's law is that it is being pushed as a natural right and a form of justice. This is a fairly recent development, historically speaking.
You have no idea what you are talking about and are projecting your own life experience on the many people who have actually experienced trauma.It's not something that can't be measured. It's very real and has clear cut physiological risks.
The thing is, you have no idea what I've experienced- nor am I going to start comparing life stories. Nor do I know what you have experienced.
You are assuming that everyone has actually experienced trauma, I'm saying that what a lot of these people feel is traumatic because they weren't equipped with the tools to deal with it in the first place.
If you get in a head on collision in a 50 year old car with no seat belt, you will likely die at most speeds. If you do the same in a brand new car with all the safety tools necessary you can walk away completely unscathed. Or somewhere in between- each collision happens in it's own way.
We're taking our kids today and stripping out their air bags. I'm saying that if a discussion, even if heated, renders you generally traumatized AND you weren't a victim of some abuse or 'real' trauma, it's because the people who had a hand in raising you completely failed you. I'm not saying you're not traumatized, I'm saying you wouldn't have been if your parents, educators, and elders did their damn job.
I was extremely privileged to have good parents. My parents were very young when they had me and I got the privilege of living in a war zone as a child just old enough to remember it.
My privilege is that I experienced life events that many of these kids will never face anywhere near and my parents did their job raising me to be able to handle it.
So yeah, I had good parents that loved me, showed me that, and made sure I knew how to take care of myself and I was extremely privileged compared to the zombie parents 'raising' kids today.
If the engineer who wrote the code understood the problem well and was a decent engineer, then the code will be maintainable no matter what the language is. Understanding the problem well is very rarely achieved.
The issue is not "is the code maintainable" or "does Go lead to unmaintainable code".
The issue is, do I wish to spend my days debugging code and writing more code, in Go? I used languages with Go's limitations back in the 1990's. I don't want to go back.
Writing and debugging code in Go is extremely more pleasurable than debugging, say, python. I write Go all day while our data scientists write python. Unfortunately python gives those guys enough rope to hang themselves and me too. It's simply harder (not impossible of course) to write unmaintainable code in a limited, static language like go.
Python in a nutshell: What you gain in flexibility and terseness, you more than lose in needing 100% unit test coverage, because every line could fail to execute (with an error that many other languages would find at compile time).
