1,306 karma · joined June 23, 2011
This is the most depressing toxic response masked as constructive criticism that I've read on this site in, well, at least a day.
OP should ignore this and continue to put your ideas out there even if they may not be perfect or match someone else's.
Most people learn JSX when they learn React. It was created by Facebook for React, after all. What does the React docs teach about className?
https://reactjs.org/docs/introducing-jsx.html
Here in the intro it doesn't even explain that you need to use className instead of class. It uses it with no explanation. Then it throws in a line about camelCasing and assumes that you understand why it changed.
Surely the JSX in depth page explains it.
https://reactjs.org/docs/jsx-in-depth.html
It does even less.
https://reactjs.org/docs/dom-elements.html#classname
Finally! In a page that seemingly has nothing to do with JSX we get told to change how we write HTML, but we're not even told why. (The htmlFor section tells us.) No wonder people are confused.
Yes, className is a property of the Element interface but it is not the attribute used when writing HTML. You're still changing how you write HTML. It is no longer standard. That is the point people are making here - JSX introduces enough edge cases that you must learn that it adds equally as much mental overhead as the template DSL for Alpine or Vue. Even if people understand the reasoning and it is not confusing, it's still a shift.
The protomolecule turned people into vomit zombies with a collective hive mind that could communicate instantaneously across the solar system and move an asteroid defying all laws of gravity, with the ultimate secret intent of building an interstellar wormhole.
Again, in the series (at least early on) humans are quite limited by known constraints and it would easily be considered hard scifi in many regards. But its central conceit was no less blithely nonsensical than that of TBP's - I simply can't understand how someone could put one in the hard category but disqualify the other.
Everyone likes to complain about the DSL that Vue or Angular use, but by the time you learn all the exceptions and oddities of JSX you could have easily learned how to use Vue's templating system.
And the fact that it's common for someone to have no idea whether a feature is part of the JSX syntax, or the framework they're using, or the HTML spec itself is problematic. It's very clear where the v- directives come from.
Look up lists of the best hard scifi and you'll find the Remembrance of Earth's Past Trilogy, or at least the Three Body Problem, on almost every one.
Many readers come away from the first book stunned at how believable the technology feels compared to something like Star Trek or Star Wars.
I'll give you that the further the trilogy goes the looser the explanations get, but that's by design. We jump far, far to the end of the universe. How does anyone give a reasonable explanation for billion year advanced technology?
On the flipside, in the Expanse, humans are limited by physics and largely modern limitations, sure, but the crux of the story is built around a magical alien molecule for which we are never given an explanation. It's hard scifi to a degree, but no less soft than say, the sophon in ROEP.
Individuals in the series largely act as if their personalities have been hit by the dual vector foil.
But the series is rarely about the individuals. Instead its about exploring how humanity - and aliens - might react to the existence of one another.
In this regard I feel Liu created in the reader a vertigo-inducing sensation of depth.
People don't need 17 streaming subscriptions. There are only so many households to sell to.
How many of those households are going to pay for a subscription so they can stream Interview with the Vampire if that's the only show they're interested in on the service? Maybe if they're a die hard fan, but they won't attract casual viewers.
Since there are fewer ads on streaming services - I won't say "no ads", because already, many of the services are including them, or at the very least, including disruptive trailers for their own shows - how do those households know that Interview with the Vampire exists as a show? On the cable TV model, AMC would run a commercial advertising the show during the airing of another show with a similar audience, drawing interest and viewers. Now it's not so simple to cross pollinate. (Anecdotally, I have a friend who is obsessed with Anne Rice and had no idea this show existed.)
You say combining the production value into a single affordable streaming service is mass delusion, I say that's the only reason it worked in the first place. The popular shows buoyed up the fringe.
* Amazon Prime
* Disney+
* HBO Max
* Netflix
* Hulu
* Paramount+
* Peacock
* AMC+
* Apple TV+
* ESPN+
* Shudder
* Sundance Now
* Youtube TV
* Tubi
* Crackle
* Roku Channel
* Discovery+
Want to watch the old Newhart show? Even with all these options, you're out of luck. Try your library. Streaming is a nightmare.
Want to watch every game your favorite NFL team plays this season but you're not in their broadcast area? Try to suss out this mess.
"HTMX is great."
"I'm burnt out on frontend frameworks. HTMX has been a good change to JS heavy alternatives."
"Can you give more thoughts on it for heavy interactions?"
"You might try LiveViewJS."
"Can you tell me about your experience with LiveViewJS?"
"Have you considered InertiaJS?"
I have no intent here other than I found this circular chain amusing. Let it go on long enough and someone will without a doubt recommend HTMX as if it's something they don't expect the parent has heard of.
Is it any wonder the OP was burnt out on web dev?
[0] https://botanicalgarden.berkeley.edu/glad-you-asked/cones
I have wanted to get rid of my smartphone and downgrade to something smaller and simpler. The one thing tying me to it is the camera. I use it on a regular basis to take quick photos of family or events around me.
If there were a compact camera on the market, I would happily carry around a phone and a separate camera in my pocket.
No such thing exists. Every so called "compact" camera is significantly larger, bulkier, and heavier than any phone on the market. I get it, they have optical zoom lenses and that takes up space. Most of the time I don't want that but there are no options for it. But even the body of the camera without the zoom lens is significantly thicker than a phone.
Near as I can tell, the dimensions of the compact camera have not changed since the last time I bought one, which would have been around 2006. The one thing I can say is that camera still works just as well as it did 16 years ago. Maybe new ones take better photos, but in the meantime, I've gone through probably a dozen different cell phones.
Sure would be nice to have a truly compact option though.
It's easy if you change the parameters.
It's a bit like the story at the top of every recipe on the web. It annoys a certain type of people, but it's also the reason most of the people are there.
It's only a matter of time, folks.
When you buy a Tesla you won't find comparisons about potential savings or benefits over other electric cars. Instead it is compared to the cost of ownership of a gas powered car.
I'd surmise that the people engaging in mundane chore games are those that want mindless entertainment.
By all accounts, I should be smack dab in their target demographic.
Yet, for some reason I don't fully understand, I have no interest in the Playdate.
The design of the main device is super slick. I want to want to play games on it. Even the idea of the crank has some appeal. I can imagine Stardew Valley style fishing, or some Zelda mini games fitting right in with it.
Then I look at it all together and my heart gives it a big old meh that I can't explain.
One, someone else would have risen up in their place and produced equally or more magnificent works that were as impactful as what we're is being discussed. Read up on Harry Seldon's work for more about this theory.
Two, the OP to whom I was responding would have been affected by one of those works in a similar manner to how they were affected by our timeline's original. The idea here being, the work is unique and dramatic, yes, but a person will always find something to cling to and what attracts them is as much about the person as it is about the art itself. It isn't as if the generations that existed before GRRM had no noteworthy literature in their lives.
Also since Wordle isn't on a nice wordle.com domain, my assumption is most people have to re-search for it frequently, boosting its Trends history.
We are living in a world where a hundred, a thousand works even more marvelous never even existed, aren't we?
> In fact -- has any fan fiction been published that attempts to continue these works
Yes, an obscure HBO show titled Game of Thrones attempted it to universal disdain.