Looks like my personal law/rule is in effect again: The harsher HN critics are, the more successful the product will be. I have no doubt Deno will be successful.
Perhaps the HN-hate is not about simplified greenfield tech as much as it is about breaking established brownfield processes and modules.
Or how about attack vectors like DNS poisoning? or government-based firewalls?
I know there's this[1], but somehow I still feel uneasy because the web is so fragile and ephemeral...
At the very least I would like to have the standard library offline...
[1] https://github.com/denoland/deno/blob/master/docs/linking_to...
What is anyone going to do about it? Anything has a chance of getting hacked or goes down just when you need it, be it GitHub, npmjs.org...
Blaming the tool for not having a protection against DNS poisoning is a bit far fetched.
See the "go-bindata" problem.
Almost all successful, mainstream, techs are like that. From a purely technical perspective, they are awful (or where awful at launch), they were just adopted because they were easy to use. When I say awful, I mean for professional use in high impact environments: financial, healthcare, automotive, etc.
Examples: VB/VBA, Javascript, PHP, MySQL, Mongo, Docker, Node.
Few people would argue that except for ease of use and ubiquity, any of these techs were superior to their competitors at launch or even a few years after.
After a while what happens is that these techs become entrenched and more serious devs have to dig in and they generally make these techs bearable. See Javascript before V8 and after, as an example.
A big chunk of the HN crowd is high powered professional developers, people working for FAANGs and startups with interesting domains. It's only normal they criticize what they consider half-baked tech.