blowski

Learn Latin and you can fake your way through so many situations.

“Considered Harmful Essays Considered Harmful”.

If you can just write some basic software, you're probably in the top 1% for computer skills in the global population. There are people in every niche of the world crying out for such help. Find something you're passionate about, and volunteer your time. I help my local political party run a website, do code clubs and Scouts.

Also, I'm part of a woodworking club. I'm rubbish at it, but it's fascinating just to watch and listen to other people who are much better than me. I've built a couple of things myself which I'm proud of.

I can understand why people would prefer FAANG & Co. weren't re-selling their FOSS, but I don't see how you can pick and choose who has access to and is allowed to run your code, and still be open source. Maybe you could have an application process, where you decide to give a license on a case-by-case basis, that can be rescinded later. But I'm not confident you'd get much traction.

The OP's point is that product owners want the benefits of being open source, but are frustrated with the downsides. You can't have one without the other, they are two sides of the same coin.

As you say, as long as either option is available, the only question is what the default should be.

The Symfony (PHP) framework now does this. Code and config examples in the docs have automated regression tests.

1. Using a cliched headline style adds authority to your article.

In all seriousness, this article is just a list of unsupported assertions. I agree with many of them because of my own experience. But those with which I disagree, there is nothing to convince me. A much more useful article would explain nuance, risks, consequences, handling strategies.

For example, "Events will arrive in order". What causes that not to happen? Does the number of events, technology used affect it? What are the consequences of believing they will arrive in order, and then discovering they don't? What are the tradeoffs in designing the system to make it happen less frequently vs tolerating them arriving in any order?

When people argue about whether React is right for a project, they are often trying to optimise for different non-functional requirements. Those against might be considering performance, filesize, and complexity. Those in favour may be optimising maintainability, reusability (with other projects), ease of hiring and onboarding new people. So they can both be right, and what they need to work out is which NFRs matter the most.

What is the value proposition? Is it to be another general purpose browser, so there’s more competition with Chrome / WebKit? Or to be a niche browser, that could be an alternative to Electron?

How close is it to achieving that?

For example, I’m terrible at front end, and design. Tailwind has a React library that handles many of the UI requirements and produces a decent-looking front end with minimal effort. I know enough React that the complexity doesn’t scare me, and there’s so much documentation and training available that it’s easy to find answers. It integrates easily with other frameworks. I can reuse components I built for other projects.

React is often not the optimal choice for the project, but can yet still be the right choice.

That said... I don't know if this is feasible with a laptop. It's much easier to pawn my laptop, than it is to steal my car and drive it without me knowing. And at what point does a computer become a server, and are those regulated differently?

Knowing that you're never anonymous online would certainly improve some conversations, and mitigate some of the ability for state actors to e.g. sow discontent online. But it would arguably be a huge inconvenience and risk for everybody, so I don't know if it's worth the cost.