shaunpersad

IMO React started going off the rails when they introduced hooks. The number of concepts you needed to learn started growing, and the old intuitiveness of React began to go away. On top of that, there was a mad rush throughout the ecosystem to implement them, many times poorly, leading to more confusion. RSC seems to be history repeating itself.

I've had the complete opposite experience. Neither YAML or TOML are very obvious to me. I always have to double and triple check that my syntax does what I assume it will do. I never have that problem with JSON.

Indeed, without clicking into it, my first thought was "why would anyone pay for free documentation?", but notifications in itself are actually pretty useful for web developers to stay on top of the landscape.

I've also never downloaded a PWA before, but using it for docs actually makes a lot of sense. I like to look things up on my phone as I think about them throughout the day when I'm not at the computer, and a PWA should make this a lot faster and reliable.

Doubtful on Firebase. It's a managed service so it's not in the same category as these DBs, and is also authenticated by default.

That's not sensible from a security perspective at all.

Airpods are by far the worst Apple product I've ever owned, for all the same reasons the author listed. I genuinely don't understand how they can still say they Airpods are "fantastic" and "wonderful".

I would say on average I encounter these issues 50% of the time. Most of my day is doing Zoom calls and either myself or the other party (using Airpods as well) will spend the first 30-60 seconds either switching out for another pair of headphones or trying to get theirs to connect.

I'm sure most of these issues actually have to do with Bluetooth, but the criticism still stands. Have we just convinced ourselves that they're great for some mysterious reason?

It isn't valid to complain about the code breaking. At least not with any consequences. Because the license explicitly says that the software is provided without warranty.

Likewise, the license explicitly says that the software is provided for free, therefore it isn't valid to complain about people not paying for it.

Nobody's on the side of the big corps here, but "why aren't you paying for this thing that I've given to everyone explicitly for free" seems nonsensical.

I assume you mean "take a penny" = "use the software for free" and "leave a penny" = "contribute back" (money or time).

With the plate there's a sign that says both "take" and "leave". In this case there is also a sign (the license) which only says "take". The intent is clear in both.

It's further not comparable because taking a literal penny deprives the next person of it, whereas here using the software for free costs the other users nothing.

But I'm not trying to nitpick the analogy, I only want to point out the the obligations (both social and contractual) are not the same, neither are the consequences.

Again, if he wanted to make money from his software, he should've put it in the license and charged the big users for it.

AITA for thinking that if you develop open-source software and your license permits anyone to use it for free, then complaining about no compensation is not a valid complaint?

I totally understand that billionaire corporations use software like this for free. But the software maintainer has explicitly allowed _anyone_ to use it for free. If you don't want them to use it for free, license it as such.

What am I not seeing here?

There are a lot of efforts to topple Disqus for precisely those reasons. I released my Disqus competitor 2 years ago and its userbase has continued to grow like clockwork every day. It may seem like a saturated market on the low end, but there's a real need for projects like these!

I do have a heater though I haven't had to use it because the tank thermometer is always within 75-80. Our house is usually very warm!

The investigation continues.