stupidcar

How would you ensure things like industrial farms use a more expensive multi-antibiotic approach instead of a cheaper single-antibiotic one without effective regulation?

People who experienced a stable childhood seem to have a natural tendency to view the period they grew up in as, if not a golden age, then a safer, simpler time. Which makes sense: You’re too young to be aware of much of the complexity of the world, and your parents provide most of your essential needs and shield you from a lot of bad stuff.

That’s not to say all eras are the same. Clearly there’s better and worse times to be alive, but it’s hard to be objective about our childhoods.

For most people and companies, yes. But for Apple? They could have used their money and influence to campaign for patent reform.

This is often quoted advice, but like many things it’s only true in moderation. People who take it too literally come across like therapists or interviewers. Some people are not comfortable talking about themselves, and most well adjusted people don’t want to talk endlessly about themselves. A good conversation should usually be an exchange.

There are also getter (and setter) properties that can be backed by private fields:

get name() { return this.#name; }

Half of this article seems to be based on the author’s unawareness of JS class syntax.

The principle reason I've stopped using Stack Overflow much, which I haven't seen mentioned elsewhere, is that its content has become too dated.

Most of my questions relate to web development — how to do something in HTML/CSS/JS. When I Google, I can almost always find a related questions on Stack Overflow, but both the question and the answers are usually from a decade ago. The techniques they recommend are totally anachronistic by modern standards.

For example, search "how to vertically center a div". The top Stack Overflow result is a question from _14 years ago_, wanting to know how to do it in all browsers "including Internet Explorer 6". And the the accepted answer is a horribly convoluted hack that could be replaced with a couple of line of CSS nowadays.

As I said, as a developer working on a software project for your employer, you often inherit dependencies you had no say in. Nor can you force your employer to negotiate a contract with the maintainer.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not arguing the maintainer has any responsibility to fix your issue. I'm only saying that the situation for the developer facing the bug is not always as simple as the article implies. Their choices are constrained by factors outside their control, and they are under pressure to deliver. It's this pressure that explains some of the frustration and anger that can bubble up in open source discussions.

I don't think there's an easy solution, but more empathy on all sides might be a start.

I agree with the article in general, but the wrinkle comes when you encounter a bug in a large, popular open source project (naming no names, but any of the major web frameworks for example) that you're using for a work project.

Fix it? Sure, except despite their ostensibly open nature, many of these projects are run as internal projects of large tech corps, and the bandwidth and interest of the team in reviewing and merging external PRs is limited to nonexistent. I've submitted small, obvious bug fixes, complete with test coverage, to projects and had them sit unreviewed for years.

Fork it? Well there is a big, big difference between spending an hour fixing a bug and submitting a PR, and forking a large and complex dependency. You're committing yourself and your team and employer to the ongoing maintenance of the fork and merging of upstream changes, just so you can merge a bug fix. Usually, that's just not practical.

Fuck off? Many third-party dependencies in mature projects are non-negotiable. Removing them would require a complete rewrite. You may not even have been the person who chose them, but you're stuck with them, and then your boss asks you to implement a feature or fix something that relies on a change or fix in a dependency. Being blocked due to upstream intransigence is very frustrating, and there is often a professional cost to saying "no" to a request, especially a bug fix, no matter how convincing you argue that it's not your fault or under your control.

This is an exasperating article. Where is the data on who these 2.6m people are, demographically speaking, what their reasons are for not seeking work, and how they supporting themselves if they don't work? 2.6m young people not working is very different from 2.6m people who've basically chosen early retirement, for example. It talks about a skills problem, but without giving real any numbers or context.

Which is not an answer to the question “Was The Washington Post the tipping point where Amazon started to collapse?”, which you were responding to.

I don’t eat at McDonalds, but that doesn’t make me think they’re going to collapse. In fact they’re likely successful for precisely for the reasons I don’t eat there.

I hate to tell you, but that momentous setback has not yet caused Amazon to collapse.

While it's true that a LAB gradient will produce a more perceptually uniform gradient, it doesn't alter the article's point that sRGB isn't a colorspace. It has an associated nonlinear gamma function that is used to help compress values to 8-bit, and the result is that interpolating between two sRGB values is not the same as interpolating between them in a proper RGB colorspace, with the result that you'll get brightness problems.

So yes, LAB will produce more perceptually uniform gradients than RGB, but browsers are exacerbating the problems of RGB gradients by not implementing them properly.

> The keywords async and await should give us the same intuition that the then does in the third. But I’ll wager for many engineers it doesn’t.

It does.