jahaja

But that would just make it somewhat more expensive to build. The problem is that the supply is always kept insufficient. If, for example, the government would build good quality housing according to need, the housing market would implode. To build according to need was the default in here in Sweden before ~1990.

The profit/investment motive is fundamentally behind the scarcity of affordable housing.

> economic damage

> nor the intellectual are educated in economics

> the actual tacit knowledge that drives economic activity

> Almost always, it is the same crowds who babble on about equality and wealth distribution too

That whole reply pretty much sums up what most right-wing climate scepticism is about; a deep fear of equality and perceived threats to their privileged position in society. Hence, going down with the ship (a good economy & status quo) seem more rational than changing course.

What's your point? The amount of people and labour needed to do those things are much much less than it once was. However we've since employed a massive amount of labour to chase profits and producing stuff that aren't necessarily needed, while still maintaining a system of scarcity for essentials.

I don't agree that dense code is easier to understand at all. It's both harder to understand and much harder to debug. I don't now why more code is in anyway reflective of how hard it is to understand. That would make the Redis code base harder to understand just because it has more features now than 4 years ago. That's just not true.

Haskell is also a good example, if it was easy to understand, maintain etc. we would have seen a good examples of large-scale apps and projects being developed in it by now. But we do not. Barely a single one.

> _if you are very familiar and experienced in both languages_.

This can be translated to "this is so cognitive challenging that you need to be really well-versed to not fuck this up now". That's not a good user-interface for something to scale on large teams.

> The US didn't kill millions of people in the Middle East. In fact it lost thousands of soldiers and a trillion dollars trying to keep the Iraqis from killing eachother. The US stepped inbetween two warring factions that have been killing eachother for hundreds of years and tried to stop it.

This must be one of the most apologist takes I have ever read. Deeply disturbing that people can actually convince themselves this for something that's relatively recent.

> I've worked on a large Scala program before, and because the team generally agreed not to let things get too crazy, it was very manageable. However, I've seen other programs in complex languages get out of hand.

In my experience this kind of gatekeeping eventually breaks down due to deadlines and similar. There's also a slow rot that always creeps in, and unfortunately seniority doesn't always keep "clever" solutions and general over engineering out.

But it looks like we'll have to agree to disagree here.

> I've seen many instances where errors are ignored by mistake, e.g.:

It's true that there's sometime bugs due to mistyping err != nil sometimes. But I have not noticed that it's too often or that it's somehow is such a large problem that it out-weigh the benefits of the clarity and simple flow brings.

> At my employer, we use a monorepo and build with bazel.

Hard to compare with an anecdote like that, I just haven't heard much complaints regarding compile times, if anything the opposite, and certainly not that it's a significant problem in a pros/cons comparison.

You seem to be writing that a simple language is somehow harder to scale for large teams. My experience is the exact opposite - too expressive language make devs have different dialects and be too "clever" for the teams long-term good - and I'm pretty dumbfounded that you can try to make sense of that.

> verbose and error-prone error handling

Verbose (and consistent) is exactly what you want for large teams. What's error prone about it?

You're tone is also suspiciously overconfident which just signals that this is more a you issue.

Do you have an example project that has problematic build times in Go?

> No language will magically give you maintainability.

That's true. But Go will certainly help with it.

> made worse by the fact that golang doesn't scale well for teams or larger programs.

What? That's one of the major recognized selling points of Go.

> we are scared of specialists and talent and want to stay mediocre

This arrogance is just so weird. A High-quality code base is easy to read and change. a.k.a simple. Redis is a good example of this. To have found the perfect abstraction, or perfect feature set fit, for a particular moment in time and feature set, may feel good but doesn't really matter.

> What does Go bring to the table?

A still maintainable code base 5 years along.

Great summary.

> The cost of this is often verbosity or repetition

This may be seen as a cost but it's also a significant gain during debugging.

But if it's one part of those strongly held beliefs that are simply wrong because they range from intolerance to bigotry, there's nothing non-partisan to make a stand.

That suggests that an organizations value system should follow along with a moving target - the current mid-ground - rather than their own values. At some point one party may just sway too far to accept a middle ground.

What kind of strange reasoning is that? Policies are enacted for multiple reasons, very often without any concrete evidence that it's better or worse.

The good thing about accounting for wealth is ofc that we can measure inequality much more precisely. That's good right?

> Confiscating others money

You can see it as a subscription fee for the service of upholding private property rights instead.

> Some evidence for this are parts of Europe is abandoning their wealth taxes.

That's not evidence. We have right-wing parties in Europe too. They introduce right-wing policies when they have power, such as the above.

So because one party has a problem with intolerance, promoting these things breaks the non-partisan label? Seems a bit like being non-partisan is an end in itself.

What a strange narrative to spin, that "X was an attempt to prevent Y" when there's no such clear relationship. You're just making up these connections.

Why are so many prominent media outlets so eager to try to poke holes into the Swedish approach?

> Sweden is changing its COVID-19 strategy — but virologist Dr. Lena Einhorn says it's far too little, too late

This is just completely false, nothing significant has changed, just some sterner recommendations in some localities.

As a Swede I find it so weird and also very disappointing that so many respected newspapers are basically making stuff up, omitting stuff, or just a paper-thin analysis to just spin some narrative (that is also mostly related to their own country's internal politics) about the Swedish approach.

Similar in here in Sweden, but my point is to highlight the focus on the mother as the primary and default child carer.

There are two parents! Is it still 1960?

I think it's much about preference, some like simpler languages, some like more expressive ones.

I for one have a really hard time liking expressive ones, hence Go & Zig is my small but high-quality toolbox rather than a larger toolbox.

I just can't get that excited about the language itself beyond a certain point, I just want simple, predictable high-quality tools to help me produce simple, high-quality code and applications.

Anyway, all of the above is ofc subjective.

As a Swede I'm astounded by how Sweden have become a pawn in other people's politics just because we had the "arrogance" of doing something they did not, but here we are. This entire article is false, especially the headline.

Anyway, regarding this point; there's wildly different infection-rates etc in different big cities in Sweden as well.

Evo said he wanted to be a dictator for life?

Dictator for life? Isn't this article about the result of an democratic election?

Usually US intervention of some kind.

Where do you imagine left-wing interviews should take place then? The corporate media doesn't seem that interested.

> Voter “suppression” insofar as it exists works at the margins

So gerrymandering, 55% voter turnout, long queues, voting on a working day, having felons not being eligible, the electoral college system etc. isn't indicative of voter suppression?

> I’ve never voted in a Presidential election,

What's the point of your personal anecdote?

> What is an “easy-to-vote, EU-style election?”

That's a single state? Why did Trump say that the Republican party would never be elected again? [0] It's not exactly a secret. France had 77% voter turnout.

> It’s popular conceptually until it comes time to make actual trade-offs

What trade-offs? Skipping a foreign war?

> Biden won the Democratic nomination because his competitors’ single-payer proposals eliminated private insurance

You're always writing in authoritatively simplistic causal language. "X caused Y", when there's no such obviously direct relationship.

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/mar/30/trump-republ...