Tiquor

Intelligently decoupled, no. Needlessly abstract, yes. Many rockstars can't tell the difference.

The problem is they also leak a lot of just petty human stuff between government functionaries. The tool is blunter than Asange makes it out to be.

Software development of novel ideas is art, not manufacturing.

Mostly just AWS apps.

Yes, this is like saying here is my slim if statement library for PHP.

If all you are doing is opening an account then your registration docs alone are enough. There has to be more to this.

Climatologist in radio said in an interview the other day that sea level could rise 3cm to 10m in the next X years. Follow up question was, of course, "What happens at 10m sea rise." There is definitely some tendency all around to be hyperbolic.

It's not a social network design issue. It's a social issue of actual humans. Our society, currently, rewards outrage amd sensitivity as opposed to reason and the free exchange of ideas. We are essentially in a post enlightenment phase moving towards new forms of regressive authoritarianism.

Boo hoo. It's not that bad. Knuckle down and learn some shit. Crikey, some of us learned this stuff before a crowd sourced 90,000 word wiki and versioned online code repository was commonplace for a 200 line library. AND get off my lawn!!

"Got us wrong" implies a fundamental inaccuracy in the concept. There is not a fundamental inaccuracy in the concept. Clarification is need to explain the nuance.

In regards to interpretations of their own work. They have largely spoken at arms length from what I'be seen and the book was popular enough to have lots of comments made via reporterst etc. I'm not claiming some coBS piracy, just the nature of these things.

Gladwell addresses this two years ago: http://www.businessinsider.com/malcolm-gladwell-explains-the...

To specifically address criticisms. One of then claim that deliberate practice is only 1/3 of the result. Gladwell, in his clarification, and original statements did not claim that deliberate practice was the only component. That was the misunderstanding from his book, not his intent.

You seem to be arguing semantics more than nuance. You aren't trying to say that practice doesn't matter. Right? Instead, it is debatable how much it differentiates the absolute best from those just below?

If so, I think the "No evidence" is a bit strong in this case. We may lack what would commonly be considered "proof" but there are good indications that practice matters.

Except Gladwell didn't "get us wrong". People who read Gladwell and misinterpreted it "got us wrong". Gladwell has spoken repeatedly and clarified his book statements, Though if you read it closely there isn't much clarification needed.

Is she really pledging to create a committee to discuss the wording of a possible amendment to discuss the potential inclusion of an alteration of an amendment to be submitted to the committee for the discussion of an amendment? That sounds more like Clinton to me.

PHP let's you change a constant in a subclass. Doesn't seem right.

I'm curious how this team got the call for the project.

They just applied the approach that browsers have to the OS. Now everyone is freaking out, which is largely legitimate, but it is hard to argue that there is not a non trivial positive result for everyone to standardize on a Windows platform if you use Windows.

What an odd comparison.

Yes, I've been developing websites since before JS existed, so it does in fact make me happy that JS has made some progress related to developer productivity in 20 years. Are they adding other baggage? It seems so, but the addition of a standard library is a things well past its time.

Remove bad and good from the discussion. JavaScript exists at a place where high level languages are expected, not assembly. JavaScript lacks the productivity enhancements of other high level languages. No standard library and poor debugging as well as loads of quirks. JavaScript, standalone, is far lass productive on a theoretical basis (I say theatrical because no language can take JSS spot in the browser due to enternchment) because of this than other high level languages.

Also, JavaScript was barely designed. Saying it was designed to not have a standard library is revisionist history. It just doesn't have one, and everyone with influence over JS continues to make poor excuses as to why it continues to not have one.

Evolving toolchain? JavaScript is 20 years old and has made nearly no improvement in terms of peductivity, highlighted by the complete lack of a standard library and the still horrid browser debugging. We should be very suspect of a language that for whatever reason can't get the basics required for a first class language right in the course of 20 years.

Most people wouldn't know an algorithm and concepts of algorithmic complexity if it bit them on the ass. Even devs. You don't need a PHD in computer science, just read some stuff and think a bit.

You are right. Most cannot. In my experienice, the very good developers can. However, I never judge a person solely on the whiteboard test and I only get to it with the candidates that have shown other indications they are good for our team.

I have never found a programming language to be complex.

The post author has a reading comprehension problem.

A valid security layer, but obscurity is not security.

Yeah, why go through all this?

It is so simple and so human it isn't even really responsive. Magic!

This framework is getting posted everywhere and it's not even really responsive. I saw this junk on Reddit too. People were defending it saying it had mobile and desktop sizes. What?

Vigilink sits between them, the shop doesn't have to be explicitly in on it.

Old (some would say current) usenet was decentralized.