oerdier

22:10 "I think the web is going to be around forever. It's only getting bigger, more ingrained in our life and more powerful, and I think we need something that's not controlled by Google."

Couple years ago on employer's Macbook a JVM profiler kept crashing midway through profiling a local webserver. No error message. After digging deep, on some forum I found the suggestion to unplug all external monitors. I did indeed have an external monitor connected and thought "No way". Yes way.

I started using Deno for its native TypeScript support. Debugging my TS libraries by stepping through the TS code in my editor is great.

I get the impression your questions are rhetorical (and in part uncivil, besides). If you reply that your questions are genuine I will answer them.

I am 30, from the Netherlands, and choose to not build up a pension (freelancer). Though, I do save money with the intent of not needing to do work for the primary purpose of earning money (i.e. maintaining a standard of living).

I eschew pensions because they are part of a mindset that in my opinion is a major yet avoidable source of the continuing enshittification of our world.

My gripe with pensions is that they are paid out indefinetely, until the receiver dies. Why not a fixed number of years? Because people would be offended or scared?. "So you're going to let me wither and die?". Given an average life expectancy, the number is still sort of fixed, but again, it's about the mindset.

As a collective, we value human life _too much_. Stripping away any nuance: we try to keep everybody alive as long as possible. Death is natural. Death is dignified. Death is sad, but sad is not bad.

I wish we were able to say this. You've contributed to society while you were able, and we salute you for it. Because most humans are terrible at long term planning, here is that money we incentivised you to save up over the decades. Spend it wisely, for there will be no more. Don't fear the reaper, but embrace him when he comes.

I only communicate this consideration to people I am certain of are able to be open for argumentation, despite them probably not sharing the same belief.

In public the only place I have communicated this consideration is right here. Privately I have communicated this consideration with family and close friends. One of these friends has started actively trying to make babies with his girlfriend after we first started discussing this topic. We have discussed it after he started trying. We have a friendly discussion about it, then move on to another topic. I find conversation does not suffer at all. That is, with the people I have carefully chosen to discuss this with. I can imagine conversation would suffer with most people I would strike up a conversation with in let's say a supermarket.

I'm not having kids because I expect the world they would live in by the time they would be adults will be too dystopian. Even more dystopian than it is already.

I opine that we humans increasingly shape our living situation such that it causes friction with our nature, our primitive psychology and biology. This friction causes increasing unhappiness. When I first realized this in my early twenties I was able to vastly increase my happiness (up to a bearable level, luckily) by removing many such man-made unnatural aspects from my life.

However, I expect that the ability to remove oneself from or avoid man-made degeneracies will be extremely difficult or impossible in a matter of decades. Even my unborn children I love too much to force them into that.

Given these expectations I consider it selfish to the degree of evil to have children. Mind, I do not consider it selfish or evil to have children. Only if you do it with the expectation that they will live in a virtual hell.

I do generally enjoy life, spending time with friends and family, working on a project I am passionate about, pursuing interests, making an effort to be healthy. However, I expect that the degeneracy will increase to a point where a person's happiness would be net negative.

Although the article 1) is a good reminder that perhaps more people than we think struggle to read documentation and 2) provides useful solutions, I do have some criticism.

As time goes on more often I see people complain about documentation to be 'too technical'. This typically comes from people who are self-taught or went to a boot camp. The author, a self-taught developer who started writing code seven months[0] before writing the article on better readability and usability of technical documentation, prompts to 'avoid jargon'.

Jargon makes documentation more readable and more usable. By definition it is a short description for something common in our field of work. Any non-jargon description would be more long-winded.

The author lists 'avoid jargon' as a method to make documentation more accessible. I opine avoiding jargon has nothing to do with accessibility, at most with inclusiveness. And indeed, right after mentioning avoiding jargon the author brings up 'use inclusive language', including 'avoid using gendered language'.

Whether or not inclusiveness in the way the author describes is important in technical documentation is a separate matter. Let us please not muddy the waters. You have all the rights to share your political opinions, but do not hide them among otherwise fairly objective suggestions to improve accessibility.

[0] https://www.africakenyah.com/learning-to-code-part-1/".