jack9

The idea is to create a lambda that's sole purpose is to act as a closure for member access restriction. I'm not sure how that could be misinterpreted, but here's your prize.

It is easier, but it's physically more demanding (including being far more dangerous).

> However, Python does not have a real privacy model.

> This is unsettling if you’re coming from a Java or C/C++ world and are expecting access modifiers

It's unsettling to a lot of people, but so what? I still don't see a solid use case for where member access (not "privacy") is a good idea. Python is one of the only languages to get access modifiers right (convention), imo and I don't even like Python.

You could implement some "privacy" with a lambda closure (which gets increasingly complex), but that's one more technique that lambdas are ill-suited for.

> run map(), reduxe() and filter() on a series of events.

Can't you do that with a btree already?

Also, poverty is relative. The cost of living has soared, alongside a nice boost to production, naturally crushing the livelihoods and a large number of people under the weight of it or as a consequence in a vicious cycle. This cycle makes it worse and worse. There's some theoretical point that UBI is supposed to offset, presciently, but bo human culture has solved this problem completely, and there is no profit in doing so for the US. I'm not sure this article is more than a talking head piece (a mild interview) from a "disruption of the status quo" character.

You definitely can have armed revolution. Some form of "imbalanced economic conditions" is the most common STATED reason for violent revolution, which the starving poor inevitably participate in.

No right click is a pretty big deal breaker for any application I would want to develop.

https://github.com/gabrielrcouto/php-gui/issues/46

If there are problems hooking up something as simple as a new mouseclick, the library is prohibitively primitive.

Adding a responsive subdomain to any domain you control is trivial and isn't registered anywhere (necessarily). I'm not sure you can achieve this, without additional requirements.

> the only relevant metric is units sold.

That's an arbitrary statement. The only relevant metric is revenue outside of whatever bars you would like to matter. Over time, units sold is a poor return and D3 was disappointing against every prediction beyond units sold. It was a disaster, in comparison to the recurring success of PoE.

> One is to appease "the gods". The other is to protect society

Defining 2 things then calling the definition different is not compelling.

The thinking that makes them less different is that they both serve "a greater good" (a just society or secular society) or "specific good" (of a community or divine favor). How you perceive the original intent or what terms you use are not relevant to the association.

It's fundamentally a philosophical question. I think it's a surprisingly insightful observation.

> If there isn't trust and discipline within a team, then that team is unlikely to be highly effective and may even slide into dysfunctionality.

> building a process into a team which signifies a lack of trust is unlikely to ever improve matters

This is one of those "I can't help fix problems because you're just hopeless if you have problems, but I can make perfect better" articles that come up time to time about why you should use X (that nobody does in practice, or not for very long).

> Mozilla as an organization makes me a bit uncomfortable

I thought you were going to mention the betrayal that caused a lot of ppl to switch (other than the slowness, inferior default tooling, etc). The deal with yahoo. Same thing that soured me on Java. If you're just going to sell out to maintain a company, because you can't support what you built, maybe you overbuilt. Or maybe it's just greed. Either way, never going back.

> I want us to transcend all the categories.

I don't think that's a happy outcome. Identity is important.

> Ethics is never a question of goals

Not to be nitpicky, but to ensure you don't actually try to use the phrase again...that's exactly what ethics are about.

I used the same method, got the same result(s).

> If the tax cuts didn't vastly improve performance then they hurt a lot.

The timescale for the determination is not left up to months. I don't personally think they were good, but to assert that you can tell right away, is disingenuous. The debt is already so large that this barely affects the momentum.

And everyone in the middle pays for it. Again, ISPs are forced to upgrade to deal with Netflix traffic. Saying that isn't the case and the market sets the price is willfully ignorant. There's a reason there are no more small ISPs available in the urban areas where they used to be plentiful (in the late 90s to early 2000s), but even if you keep pretending it's a series of tubes, someone has to pay for that capacity who isn't sharing the revenue.

> That's not nothing.

WA passed a law to ensure it. That's not nothing. Waiting for a decision and hoping the status quo sits (I mean it's a great story to ride on the coattails of and tell your constituents you did something), is nothing.

> The WWDC, sacred nerd summit of Appledom, is where they announce things like a new “night mode” for the operating system and try to convince programmers that Apple Watch matters.

Bloomberg got an honest laugh out of me.

Indeed, a terrible and obviously immoral decision by the supreme court to appease. How this has been downvoted so heavily, causes me concern.

> Release: Let go of people who don’t align with your values.

I hate the "similar values" proposition, like that's something practical to align with the working members of teams. How about the same attitude and similar ability? Measuring that is not easy, but it's a heck of a lot easier than trying to measure "values".

> A proper analogy would be to compare your citations to the ethical condemntations of Facebook made 50 years from now.

When the findings are published has no bearing on the ethics of the experiments. Ironically, the half century lead time does not impinge on the impact, as much as the chronology strengthens the impact.

> What do you think Microsoft would do to harm Github?

GVFS. I believe Github will only deploy to Microsoft's GVFS sometime after acquisition. This is one of the more obvious plans, I thought shrug

I can use it just fine too. It's not unusable, it's a barrier. The defense of arbitrary syntax as no-consequence is misguided and ultimately irresponsible (in a lazy sense).

What do you mean by bias here? Some languages are practical, some more/less efficient. The BEAM was BAD in 2005. The language is ugly and this has hindered adoption in a myriad of applicable areas for decades. Elixir was a wrapper for people who already knew Erlang. Languages don't live in a vacuum, they are for people and organizations (where decisions are made about non-existent people) to use. Erlang could be done without being so horribly ugly and with more syntactic specificity (give atoms an identifying symbol). You have to consider the pareto distribution when thinking about design, not just how intelligent some programmers naturally are.

> Monocultures like this interest me.

Just because they call it a monoculture, doesn't mean it has anything to do with social behavior per se. It's a technical choice. Might as well ask why every function isn't implemented in X languages or X styles. Using a singular tool in a build is the default. It's a surprise to me, that they still were trying to support a bunch of disparate compilers. Let someone else handle that, while you run the race of feature implementation, which is hard enough.

Emotions (and the feelings that combine to form attitudes) are delusions does not make sense. Physiological responses from an infant onward, are informed, but does not suppose a mental model that diverges from reality. The psychological assessment that we have multiple competing personalities that form our mental self inevitably leads to something that appears to be semi-random state. It's just internal physiological chaos manifest.

You illustrated the point. The GPs comment is philosophical but there's still people who are fooled by these comments into thinking they have novelty, when it's simply a position that has existed since inception.

A polyglot is harder to reason about than a single language, due to social concerns. Mostly this is due to the efficiency of singular concern and custodianship as opposed to disjointed languages with their own.