mg74

This decision has nothing to do with the financial sector in Iceland. It is the government that has allegedly failed to implement some required changes, specifically it is some software that some government agency is supposed to be running already.

Flutter is very good. Therefore Dart.

Throughout the entire 2008 crisis, the payment networks never stopped functioning. Not for a day, not for a minute.

Iceland is very much at this forefront. The payments infrastructure is operated by the local banks (directly or indirectly), not by Visa/Mastercard.

Sure, you do what you want, no one is stopping you.

But I guarantee you'd be amazed of just how quickly you could go from installing the Flutter plugin into VS Code to actually developing a fully hot-reloaded app inside an iOS emulator. The DX of Flutter is by far the best I've seen anywhere.

Dart is a really efficient language to compile down to native. Javascript/TS will never be that.

And in what sense it is hypocrisy to compile?

Dart is fine. Way better than Java. So don't let that stop you, you will pick it up in no time.

This.

STOP EATING SUGAR PEOPLE!

Dart + Flutter is for building native iOS and Android apps. Fuchsia will surely be a target in the future, but it is not THE host for Flutter apps.

Dart + Flutter compiles down to native ARM code. Don't know what the memory profile is but could be promising.

Have you actually done it? I have, a team of 10 to 15 programmers building it for over an year (SPA, deployed on web, iOS and Android), and now I lead a team of 5 programmers maintaining it and developing new features. I will gladly pay the cost of a good abstraction for lower complexity.

The complexity and maintenance costs of developing a real-world application in standard JS are also real.

Prettier stopped working for me for 2 weeks some months ago. Least productive 2 weeks for me for a long time.

The cognitive load it costs to worry and fret about code formatting....

(thank you)

Sadly, the reason PoW works as a way to provide a trustless system that functions as long as 51% of the power is neutral, the solution has to be completely random and unpredictable. Otherwise the operator with the most powerful rig would outperform everyone else often enough for the system to be susceptible to bad actors.

It is not sufficient for the PoW just to be extremely hard.

I get the relationship between the smelters and the power industry in Iceland, but despite that industries problems (I am not a fan) at least there is some economic activity going on there.

With mining, essentially we are building damns and steam generators to fuel heat dispensation for the benefit of helping some speculators win bets against other speculators. This is not economic activity imo, but some fancy techno-casino. I feel I am very justified in calling it idiotic.

And lets not ignore the externalities here. Just as miners can server as price competition to the smelters, they also out-price other potential activities. Not just as buyers of electricity, but also as investment for those that are running the datacenters. As long as the mining option is on the table, these operators and investors have no incentive to find other uses for their computer farms. Just buy some ASICs and be done with it.

Judging from your comment Im assuming you do not live in Iceland, apologies if Im wrong.

The reality is that there are only a handful of energy providers in Iceland capable of providing the energy at this scale, Landsvirkjun being the largest (by far).

These companies are either government owned or very sensitive to political realities, and will stop selling energy to mining centers if the pressure becomes strong enough.

Im already here. And the problems with smelting dont negate the idiocy (imho) of mining.

Clean energy can not grow indefinitely in Iceland, there is only so much water falling so many meters. There may be other methods involving steam and earth warmth that Iceland may be uniquely competitive in, but that is going to require the invention of new technologies and processes.

You are assuming that mining for crypto is a useful thing to begin with. Not everyone agrees with you. And many here in Iceland are not enamoured with the idea that we should build more damns and loose more waterfalls so some people can get rich off speculation. Even if it is more eco friendly than people getting rich off speculation in China.

The crux of the issue isn't mentioned until the very last paragraphs of the article:

"One particular concern is cryptocurrency mining—a processor and electricity-intensive computing process for generating currencies such as bitcoin. The process accounts for about 90% of Iceland’s data center industry in terms of electricity consumed"

If these data centers where actually being utilised for something useful then people would be happier about this. But no, it is just some speculators mining for crypto.

"The biggest complexity is that Git has a very conservative approach to compatibility, requiring that repositories remain compatible across versions."

This, above all else. That I never, or anyone else on our team, ever has to worry about wether they are running an "older version" of git is such a win.

And is it anymore than other big corporation? That pages lists 24 products, which doesn't seem that much to me. There have been plenty of stories about retired products at FB, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, etc.

Im not disputing that Google does this, but ever since Google Reader was stopped this has become a stock comment on basically every HN discussion on Google products (other than search & ads) and has long ceased to have any value at all, and seems to be just accepted as some gospel without any evidence that this is a bigger problem with Google than the other tech giants.

This knee-jerk-ism is tiresome. There are plenty of products that Google has retired, and plenty of products that Google has continued to invest in. Just like any other big corporation.

(acquisition still running, top of my head: Google Docs, Android, YouTube, DoubleClick)

I did listen to the podcast. Galloway's view is IMO pretty much the old media perspective: If only the media had banded together, Google and FB would have been forced to pay for the content and old media would have been saved. He completely ignores the perspective that the supply of free content has grown exponentially over the last decade, while my time to consume media has pretty much stayed constant. I might pay (and do) for SOME old media content, but the days of them being the gatekeepers are long over.

How would the users blacklist the miners using the newer inflationary protocol? Is it even possible? By design, the longest blockchain wins, and that would be the one with the inflation if the majority of miners agreed.

Just want to put down my flag in the sand and say I love Redux. It is my tool of choice whenever dealing with anything that contains state and (with it's partner in crime, Redux Saga) anything that has to do with the real world (dreaded side-effects).

Thumbs up on Redux, your boilerplates are my sanctuaries.

The author states that "is impossible to deny that Facebook, Google and Amazon have stymied innovation on a broad scale", and then points to falling profits of music and newspaper industries as the victims of said stymied innovation, the very actors that have fought the innovation of the last 25 years the hardest.

Personal favourites: My Neighbour Totoro Kiki's Delivery Service Spirited Away Princess Mononoke

Export every component like this:

export class MyComponent extends React.Component { ... }

export default SomeHOC(MyComponent)

And in your test simply import the non-hoc version:

import { MyComponent } from './mycomponent'

Now the HOC won't get in the way of your testing.

Thanks, that's what I wanted to know