incadenza

Listen I think it’s important to keep people in the loop and I always do. It’s common courtesy. But after having experienced this as a job seeker countless times it’s hard for me to have sympathy with these companies now that the power dynamics have shifted a bit in favor of employees. Behaviors like this are learned.

Yeah, similar to how lodash makes it explicit in the docs. That would be great.

I'm glad to see work being done here. Recovery rates from Alcoholism are grim by every measure I've seen. There have been similar breakdowns with Monkeys consuming alcohol as well, if I remember correctly. With 15% preferring alcohol to sugary drinks, and roughly 5% becoming highly problematic consumers.

According to a pretty charitable read of this lisence, then yes. Absolutely.

Good write up. For better or worse, I think most the issues you mention apply equally to React.

I’d argue that genuine curiousity about how the world works is more than sufficient to drive rational inquiry. I didn’t start tinkering as a kid in search of a religious feeling, I did it because I, as most primates are, was curious about how things worked. I just don’t see it.

so this will make the actual http request the first time, then keep a recording? I’m not entirely clear how this works from the docs.

Yeah, fair point.

I meant internal test suite code. As in, the client / customer would have to be able to run my test suite (and likely watch it fail) to see the error code.

Yeah. Save the cheeky errors for internal tests.

I’m sure the anti-NPM brigade is on its way, but I recall there being a huge backlash against removing this error code from Node a few years ago.

This kind of relates to the “neural Darwinism” idea. Or “use it or lose it” as it relates to certain behaviors. I don’t know if it’s true but it’s a useful way to think about it.

Awesome, thanks for the info, super interesting.

I would suggest reading Quine’s ‘Two Dogmas of Empericism’ for the relevant issues there.

I thought the part about the dialect was so interesting. It’s tough for me to make out what the dialect would have sounded like. I wonder if there are any remaining parts of the US that use it.

Ah, got it, that's unfortunate. I remember some time ago, Mozilla said that they wouldn't put a browser on iOS unless it could use Gecko. When I saw the app I assumed that the restrictions had changed.

Point taken, but Firefox is on iOS FWIW.

I’m about a 1.5

Any good resources you could suggest for learning more about what you describe as the relevant areas?

Genuinely curious, how is Go more anti FP than Java or other more classic imperative languages?

Bucket A. Which could be articulated more generally as: failure to capture the world as it really is.

It's only anthropomorphizing in the sense that we're discussing two systems capable of propelling automobiles around. Presumably, they're both in the business of avoiding concrete barriers.

If one system is steering the vehicle into things that the other system would, in most conditions, reliably avoid, it bears some discussion.

It's not a True Scotsman in this context. The point is that humans tend to crash into things they're not fully aware of, short of self-harm.

Either:

A) The autopilot could not see a concrete barrier in its path. B) More likely, and as the story reports, it WAS aware of the danger but didn't do anything.

Either case is at least worth discussing, no?

You’re missing the point. The crucial fact according to OP is that the car did something that a fully aware driver would not ever do. It’s at least worth acknowledging that.

These Mozilla posts are very well done! As per the article, I'm always excited to see the JS community converge towards decent standards. This has been a long time coming.

Agreed, it's a fascinating topic. I've been reading Bostrom's Super Intellegence which has been a great introduction to this range of problems.

I generally agree. I think moral consequences become especially relevant in the field of AGI.

Similarly, I’d put Nagel’s “What It’s like to be a Bat” as required reading in that group as well.

Except for the fact that most people use these services in the browser even when there are native clients available? In nearly all of the listed cases the bottleneck is almost always the network and not the JS runtime.

Clearly the users are wrong, I guess? Perhaps you should explain to them why your delicate design sensibilities dictate that they should download native clients because you think HTTP has gone off spec.

Let me guess... you're a COBOL dev and think computers should have never developer GUIs.

Anybody have an idea what the exciting new features they’re planning are?

Am I missing something in thinking that a reasonable solution is to temporarily block downloads of potentially malicious packages? Why remove them?

EDIT: or better yet, don’t allow people to download the update, just keep users on the old, ostensibly safe version until everything gets sorted?