Everyone thinks that something they don't want to pay for is a "waste of money". When that something that you want to quit spending money on can be characterized as "other people who I don't identify with", you get the right.
SF is a mess because of liberal mismanagement (I say that as someone who identifies as left). Spending money at massive scale without asking the people you're spending money on to fix something in society (whether it's their own actions, or something that they are responsible for). SF went from a 80B surplus to a 15B deficit... and what get it gain from that? How is the city better... It's not.
>When that something that you want to quit spending money on can be characterized as "other people who I don't identify with"
Everyone wants to spend money on something or someone they identify with. It's not like the left has showed any leniency against those it deems unworthy.
Sure they have. They believe in social safety nets for all (livable wages to reduce crime, for example). They also tend to be more socially inclusive (I rarely see a racist gay person for example).
Not from a government perspective, but does anyone want to 'quit spending money' on anything anymore? I find that as a society we've become addicted to spending on stuff and we never cut back spending on anything anymore.
I don't know if the majority agrees but we've all become addicted to e-commerce spending. The number of shoes is not counted in number of total shoes owned but number of shoes bought per month. A stock metric vs a flow metric.
Everybody has a vague idea that they're addicted but nobody seems to want to acknowledge it or even track it.
It's almost as if cutting frivolous spending is no longer a virtue.
> This might be excluding anybody that cannot work after hours, for a reason or another.
Maybe I'm reading into this but I see this type of response a lot on HN.
> A: You need experience. Get some after hours
> B: I don't have any time after hours. It's not fair
Like gees! What do you expect?
B: I wanna be guitar player in a rock band
A: Well, if you don't play guitar, take lessons after hours
B: I don't have any time after hours
A: So what do you expect me to do about it? I'm not about to add someone who's never played guitar and can't demonstrate the skills as a guitarist in my band. It's not my problem that you can't play, don't have the time to learn, and yet want to be in my band.
---
Same for any company: So what do you expect me to do about it? I'm not about to add someone who's never programmed games and can't demonstrate the skills as a game programmer in my team. It's not my problem that you can't code games, don't have the time to learn, and yet want to be in my gamedev company.
Totally agree. I really don't understand what people think the solution should be. If person A has 10,000 hours (because they've been doing something for years) and person B has 1,000 hours (because they had other commitments) you ofc (save other reasons) have to hire person A. It sucks but I genuinely don't know what else to say.
I work in quantitative trading and the number of people that think they can just throw a script together and make money is... well, if I had a dollar for each...
This person is speaking from the employer's perspective, I struggle to see how becoming a parent would change the equation for their side.
They want to hire people who already have some degree of relevant experience. That is a reasonable requirement. If that excludes some parents who don't have time, so be it. Being a parent is one of many lifestyle choices that can limit one's ability to arrive at an interview with sufficient background knowledge. It does not warrant special treatment & exception just because it's parenting.
It's not possible to have it all in life. The choice of having kids (and being a good and responsible parent to them) obviously closes some other doors.
This to me is no different than the popular digital cameras vs the pro cameras. The built in app is targeting the masses. it can never make every choice perfectly and further it doesn't need to please everyone. That's the entire point of having apps
OpenGL is not close to deprecation. It may be decades before mainstream GPUs stop supporting it. The amount of non abandoned software built on top of OpenGL that is not being migrated to Vulkan is mindboggling.
> In fact it's already deprecated on a device ~50% of American's use (an iPhone). It's also deprecated on MacOS
This is an Apple problem, not an OpenGL problem. Linux (and by extension Android, maybe Switch), Windows (and by extension Xbox), BSD (and by extension Playstation) all support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan. Apple has had issues supporting OpenGL since forever, and its OpenGL support (even before Vulkan) stagnated at 4.1, which was released ten years ago.
OpenGL is not deprecated at all. OpenGL 4.6 is a very, very modern API supporting things that many games still don't have, like mesh shaders, SPIR-V, etc.
> Linux (and by extension Android, maybe Switch), Windows (and by extension Xbox), BSD (and by extension Playstation) all support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan.
Yeah... no.
On Windows you're better of using DirectX since its tge only officially supported API. Xbox only supports DirectX.
Playstation only has its own graphics API.
Switch nominally has support for Vulkan, but they have their own graphics API.
> it's already deprecated on a device ~50% of American's use
America is one market among many. iOS usage is ~28% globally.
Even if Google suddenly announced their plans to deprecate OpenGL ES on Android, it would happen in the mid 2020s at the very earliest for bleeding edge devices, and late 2020s for whatever is considered "legacy" at that point.
A realistic scenario is that billions of people will still rely on some form of OpenGL at the end of the 2020s, and full deprecation will happen somewhere in the 2030s.
This is also like 10 years old. OpenGL did not die easily, the new replacements are at wars and I have yet to see an universal API/library replaces OpenGL.
It was labeled "Automatic graphics switching" in past releases. It appears to be gone completely. I just confirmed it was under Battery on 12.5.1. This is a shame. The Intel GPU on the 2019 MBP is pretty anemic and it is definitely felt when programming in some editors.
No, the problem is bad developers pulling in dependencies for trivial functionally. If there was a `for-loop` npm package bad devs would be pulling it in instead of writing their own for loops. Padding on the left is something if it doesn't exist you write it in a few lines of code yourself. You don't add a package for such trivial functionality.
Nope, this is a bad take, parroted without understanding; if it got moved into the std lib, it was probably useful enough. You can even read why in the original proposal if you comb the archives enough (from https://github.com/tc39/proposal-string-pad-start-end):
> It is highly probable that the majority of current string padding implementations are inefficient. Bringing this into the platform will improve performance of the web, and developer productivity as they no longer have to implement these common functions.
You are neglecting the risk-factor of pulling in libraries from unknown authors on npm vs the stdlib. The package-bloat problem is one of culture, where developers keep neglecting this risk, only seeing the 5 lines of code they save by importing something, without seeing the potential cost and tech debt of having to review, maintain, update and security-monitor this dependency for all future.
Nobody thinks leftPad was not a useful function. The question is, was it useful enough to counter all the risks of npm, probably not. In the stdlib there is no such risk.
Ah, and now we’re talking about the real issue, which was the security risk.
My point has been this whole time that left-pad was not a story of a trivial function needlessly pulled from an external source as the person I replied to had claimed, and it appears you agree. Good!
I think a large chunk of this is the tendency in larger Rust projects to split themselves up into smaller library crates, rather than single crate monoliths: single libraries that you use may depend on 5 different crates all from the same project, that count as separate in the number you’ve quoted. On top of that, C bindings tend to live in their own crate, so while you might depend on the openssl crate, it in turn depends on openssl_sys which contains raw bindings (rather than a nice Rust wrapper). That all said, I think crates.io is still at the initial stage of “tiny crates each doing a single thing” that I think every registry goes through to begin with.
curl | bash doesn't bother me because I do it like twice a year from sites I trust. On the otherhand, the node crowd uses "npx command" all the time where npx will download and execute code from the net. Unlike "curl | bash", "npx command" is something you're expected to do 10s or 100s of times a day. Each one of those times is a chance for you to have a typo and execute code from some randon source like if you type "npm commmand" or "npx comman" or "npx coomand" or "npx comman dargument", etc...
?? I saw it in the theater when it opened. nothing was ruined. maybe there is a second cut I'm unaware of. Certainly the cut Roger Ebert gave 4/4 stars, which is the original theatrical cut, isn't the one with spoilers
"A director's cut of Dark City was officially released on DVD and Blu-ray Disc on 29 July 2008. The director's cut removes the opening narration, which Proyas felt explained too much of the plot, and includes approximately eleven minutes of additional footage, most of which extends scenes already present in the theatrical release with additional establishing shots and dialogue."
I originally saw the director's cut, then went back and watched a video with the opening narration. I felt that my viewing of the movie was improved having seen it originally without.
Here is an interview with director Alex Proyas where he explicitly discusses the removal of the opening narration [1]:
BLAKE: What is the biggest difference between it and the original?
ALEX PROYAS: The general pace of the movie is quite different. The director’s cut more or less is the version I had originally sent out when I was first testing the movie. We had problems in testing and it’s why the studio had us add in the voice overs, which I thought was rubbish really! My instinct then was when something wasn’t playing right to speed it up and I’ve never been happy with that, so this version is back to a more leisurely and thoughtful pace it was meant to be. The voice over from the beginning is gone of course. There is also a few scenes added back that were ditched that I think are perfectly good scenes and I have no idea why we dropped them then.
There are plenty of users for whom having to write configuration in JSON is a significant barrier, either because they find the syntax obtuse or because they want things like comments, multiline strings, or expressions. Using a DSL can be a huge UX improvement in many cases.
As an example, SF has the highest tax revenue per capita in the USA
https://www.usnews.com/news/cities/slideshows/us-cities-with...
So why is it so dysfunctional? My guess is the right would say because so much is wasted on the wrong things.
Note: I'm not saying the right is correct. I'm only suggesting a different interpretation of their POV.