I don't know React very well but I used Angular in a large project and it was completely baffling to me how overly complex it was. In certain areas of the application it felt like it was completely unpredictable what value the state was going to be.
I sometimes long for the simplicity of something like Windows Forms.
I've spent my teenage years making Windows Forms applications, and the complete lack of state management isn't something I'd like to go back to.
Sure, with the knowledge I have now I could set up a whole MVC model with event based updates to form state, but at some point you're just rewriting the complex libraries that you're trying to avoid.
Good interactive state management, especially when you're tying to combine it with a stateless protocol like HTTP, is very difficult. Every complex library that's out there started off as a "simple way" of doing things.
There's nothing stopping you from doing Windows Forms applications of course, and the modern evolution of ASP.NET does look pretty inviting if you're over all that frontend crap, but don't underestimate the problem libraries like Angular solve. Microsoft tried it with Blazor, and that'll quickly get you a website that's a hundred megabytes in size because it downloads all of .NET into your browser.
I always find it fascinating that what you are seeing is a 1500 year old `close-up' of the nebula as that is how long (approximately) it took for the photons to get here.
Can anyone explain why Htmx is such a big deal? I really don't get their 'motivation' section on their landing page.
I mean, for example, the first motivation it lists is 'Why should only <a> and <form> be able to make HTTP requests?', why is that an issue? And 'Why should you only be able to replace the entire screen?', I mean that hasn't been an issue since XMLHttpRequest or am I missing something?
> 'Why should only <a> and <form> be able to make HTTP requests?', why is that an issue?
I wouldn’t call it an issue, but maybe you would like individual elements to fetch their own data. Sure you can do the same thing with JS in the browser (calling fetch or XMLHttpRequest), but htmx lets one do it with attributes on tags.
The “replace the entire screen” business is a jab at React-like frameworks. Although they all claim to update only the DOM parts that change, it’s very easy for a codebase to [accidentally] force a full page redraw.
HTMX is meant to relatively cleanly interact with updating portals on a rendered page. Where the serve-side handles the post data and simply returns the HTMX fragment that gets injected/replaced.
I can see the appeal, it's what ASP.Net WebForms probably should have been. And for that matter could probably cleanly fit with ASP.Net MVC and Razor views.
This looks super cool, can't wait to try it. Does anyone know why the project is called 'A Logo-like DSL for Godot', it doesn't really mention Godot much except for it being a (runtime?) dependency?
Initially I used Godot’s scene format to store Enu’s levels, so someone could learn and prototype in Enu, then load the project into Godot for things Enu didn’t support. That didn’t really pan out though and I’ve dropped the idea for now. I’d love to revisit some day.
Currently Enu is just a consumer of Godot. I’ll update the description soon. Thanks for the interest!
This is fantastic. I would highly recommend DragonRuby if you like Ruby as a language and would like to dip your toes into 2D game development. The community is very welcoming too.
+1 on the community being kind and welcoming. That to me is a major factor. I've learned so much from the community, and it extends beyond just making game dev. The community organizes jams, monthly game clubs, and supports one another.
This is cool but I think technically minded people vastly overestimate how many people would use it even if they knew about it. It's just another thing to remember. I have an iPhone 8 and the 3D Touch version of it is clever but it doesn't seem to activate all the time (I'm not sure if that is a bug or not).
Apple probably collects usage statistics and knows no one (by approximation) uses it so they scrap it. That's sad, but understandable as well.
Anyone who works on a job site will love this (e.g. architects, electricians, plumbers, etc).
Much like on the other extremely, pilots absolutely love the tiny iPad Mini because it can easily fit in the cockpit (and even be mounted to the windshield).
For a laptop, it's a small machine with a large screen. For a desktop, don't know.
This is probably going to cost a lot and installing Linux would probably mean to forfeit all the screen modes except one (I don't expect much driver support - but maybe xrandr?) anyway I can see me buying something like that.
Too bad for the missing touchpad buttons (three of them, this is almost a deal breaker), wonderful not having a number pad, I didn't check if it can be upgraded (RAM, SSD) and which ports it has. My wishes: video, ethernet, 3.5 audio jack, at least two USB A 3.0, USB C would be ok, I bet there are adapters for old hardware.
Not parent and I don't have kids but if I did, there's no way I'm giving them an ipad.
They can have coloring books, crayons, Legos and building blocks, doll houses, physical plastic, wooden and plush toys, restricted access to PCs/consoles, but no portable smart devices with screens, online connection and spyware apps.
By kids I'm talking about pre-teens. They can get smart devices when they're teenagers.
So... the kids will probably not have much friends as all the other kids will be socializing online even if that's inferior to physical friendship.
Good or bad, that is the norm now and if you don't let your kid access to a tablet while all the other kids do, that child will be lacking a lot of confidence and practical tech skills.
A balance with both iPad time and physical activity time would be a better tradeoff IMO.
> Good or bad, that is the norm now and if you don't let your kid access to a tablet while all the other kids do, that child will be lacking a lot of confidence and practical tech skills.
I'm pretty sure most of us on HN grew up without access to iPads, but still somehow developed practical tech skills, including the ability to learn to use iPads.
We've grown up to something technically harder-to-use than an iPad, and I'm comparing today's equivalent.
If we normalize this to current HN audience's childhood (roughly), it's more like not touching a computer and not seeing a modem until 20s, while all the kids know at least how to turn a computer, use Windows Explorer/Mac Finder, developed motor skills to use a keyboard efficiently, know how to modify Word docs etc. and the social norm is knowing all these things (as opposed to our chilhood).
Sure, a legendary hacker might arise after touching a computer first time after 20s, but much less likely.
Certainly, but all the technology with which we grew up is still out there. A kid who hasn't had an iPad is not automatically a kid who hasn't had any hands-on experience with technology, and, while I can imagine there's some debate here about whether or not it's feasible to raise a child in today's world without an iPad or equivalent device—I'm not a parent, and so wouldn't presume to participate—I can't imagine anyone here advancing the position that "I'll raise my kid without any kind of 'hacking' experience."
Then how do your kids communicate with those who only have android devices? That's a big social issue among teens in the US.
iMessage is never popular in Europe, as everyone here uses cross platform apps like Whatsapp, Telegram, Snapchat, etc. due to the lower market share of IOS vs Andorid.
Some of the auto updated apps have a history of adding circumventable embedded browsers in about boxes and things on Android which can be used to browse the internet. This happens on iOS too but the browser engine is safari and is subject to the same white lists as normal Safari.
This is a fairly large security concern if I'm honest generally.
Unless your kids are network engineers who can join wifi networks or get around firewalls, or hackers who can defeat parental controls, you should be able to control what they do on an iPad pretty easily, including making it an offline device. You can even lock them in to a single app if you really wanted to.
There are some things which you should not answer unless you have experienced it yourself. Having kids is one of them.
All your activity sounds good on paper but real life does not work like that. Kids are smart, they can see you are on your smart device, they can see others are on their phones/ipads when they go outside. You dont want your kid to be a social outcast.
Sometimes when you want to do your chores or want some quiet time for yourself the best solution is to give your kids an ipad so that they remain busy.
I don't think that's a responsible attitude to have. "You dont want your kid to be a social outcast", sure, but sometimes you have to lay down the law. That starts with setting an example yourself.
If you're always on your phone, you're sending your children the social signal that that's OK.
parent here, if you can’t work while your 3-5 year old is entertained with drawing or reading (looking at pictures in) your books/library, you didn’t teach them to entertain themselves. Music and radio drama work wonders too.
Just compare their feedback over time using the different approaches and you’ll notice that they work more their imagination when the content is not laid out entirely by someone else.
I agree this is a good attitude and start off point for parents-to-be but I have to agree with other commenters that it is impractical and goes out the window pretty quickly unless you have nerves of steel :). Imagine for example being on a flight with a toddler throwing a tantrum, for the sake of everyone's sanity an iPad is a wonderful device.
Having said that it is all about balance, and limiting screen time is a good way to go about it.
Some parenting advice: if your toddler loses their marbles, do not pacify them with a reward. That's a seriously bad idea.
I found the best low stress and low effort solution was to be a larger drama than they are. This culminated in myself lying on the floor in the Lakeside shopping centre in the UK screaming my head off. Oh yes I can do it too. And it makes you look like a dick when I do it. Make sure you talk to them at the same level afterwards. You are now equals :)
She never did it again after that and has been a joy. Advice has worked for other people.
> agree this is a good attitude and start off point for parents-to-be but I have to agree with other commenters that it is impractical and goes out the window pretty quickly unless you have nerves of steel :). Imagine for example being on a flight with a toddler throwing a tantrum, for the sake of everyone's sanity an iPad is a wonderful device.
It doesn't have to be the kid's iPad though.
We have a "family" nintendo switch. I sure don't mind if they play with it on the plane, but at home they only have access to it on request and within a limited time. Same as for a laptop if they want to watch something or my eldest daughter's phone. There is no way these devices stay in their room either. I give them an allotted time, and all these devices need to get back to my office where the charging cables are once time is over. And if for some reason they try to cheat and use the fact I am busy with something to not take notice they are still using it, they get punished for a week without access to said device.
In the end I am glad my daughters are so creative and spend so much time drawing, building things with cardboard, glue and tape, or play outside. Usually screen time is limited to when I am cooking for dinner, after they took a shower. They still aren't stranger to tech but don't need to be hooked on social medias. My daughter's phone is mostly used to play music and for whatsapp, as well as camera when we go out. But since her time on it is limited, every comm is asynchronous and doesn't end with her having to answer to every single notification right away.
Haha, man, gotta love how you get downvoted for wanting to be a proper loving father and not someone who outsources the upbringing of their children to youtube and roblox!
It's a tool. Another creative outlet. I bought my kids ipads and apple pencils and they love them. My eldest, now at university bought a new iPad Pro recently and uses that exclusively as her work computer.
What you're doing is enforcing a semi-luddite position on your own kids because you can only leave them unattended with old things. Just be a parent ffs.
My child is 4. They prefer fruit and vegetables over sweets. Milk or water over soft drinks. They come home from nursery and, in the warmer months, play outside with their friends until 7pm. They also draw and do "craft", and we do "science" together (make slime etc). They also have a base model iPad.
It's locked down using a combination of Apple's parental controls, controls on the router and NextDNS. The level of pedagogic software available on the platform is excellent, especially for preschool. There are also other 'games', like Crayola's Create and Play[0] app (available for Android too) which are fun, engaging, creative and educational.
Like it or not, this is the world they are going to grow up in. It's the parents job to teach them to be responsible with everything, from sweets to using technology. Kids aged 3-12 can get as much out of a device like an iPad as any teenager.
In early childhood, children's brains will rapidly adapt to their environment (https://academic.oup.com/pch/article/11/9/571/2648303?login=...), for example Aboriginal Australian children develop strong spatial cognition to survive in an environment with few landmarks (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/001002...). It'll be interesting to see what happens when the generation of children whose brains have adapted to oversaturated, constantly changing, narrative-free stimuli by being raised on YouTube Kids reaches adulthood.
> It'll be interesting to see what happens when the generation of children whose brains have adapted to oversaturated, constantly changing, narrative-free stimuli by being raised on YouTube Kids reaches adulthood.
This sounds word for word like worries about the first generation of children raised with ready access to TVs.
This is a great read. I absolutely love the iPad, and it's one of the few devices I still find magical everytime I pick it up. I have an older iPad Pro 10.5" with a Smart Folio keyboard and I wonder if his setup is a big step up in terms of ergonomics. I've tried using my iPad for productivity related tasks but I find it too cramped.
The 13” screen enables me to do split windows and multi task effectively. I don’t see split windows working well on an 10.5”. Having said that - iPad’s can connect to external monitors so 10.5” might just be a perfect size. K33g over at GitLab (who is also a core committer to golang) uses a 10.5”
> If it could run Xcode natively it would be so much better
That made me think, Apple must have some internal prototype of Xcode for iPad? Creating iOS apps on iPad could be a killer 'Pro' app, convincing people to choose a Pro version over the regular iPad. Maybe they are worried apps created on iPad wouldn't be quite the same standard as apps created on regular Macs?
My problem with using the 13" iPad was that with the keyboard, it's not that much smaller/lighter than an Air. You still have a big battery and display, which will be roughly the same size. While I like the keyboard, it adds a decent amount of bulk.
I also use my iPad for drawing / handwritten note taking. This is a use-case which the iPad is clearly superior compared to a MBP/MBA. :)
I have the iPad pro (12.9") but I don't use external screen (but I used to work with an Air 11.6" for years)
And with GitPod it becames almost the perfect notebook
btw, I'm not a core committer to golang but gololang (based on Java & invokedynamic)
One thing that definitely resonates with me is his mention of sauces when he explains the differences between star ratings.
Quite often when I visit a great restaurant I find its a sauce that lifts a dish from the good to memorable. I always thought that was
because of the stock made from scratch. This is quite hard to replicate at home- store bought stock cubes add very little depth of flavour to a dish and making stock from scratch, well, unless you have a lot of time on your hands its not going to happen.
Buying a rotisserie chicken and throwing it in an instant pot with some carrots, onions, celery, and enough water to cover it (and some thyme, rosemary, and bay leaves) for an hour or so has surprisingly good results, and is fairly easy to do. Pour the liquid through a strainer. I pour it into ice cube trays and freeze it, so I can just grab a couple of cubes when I'm making a pan sauce or soup.
It's easy enough to start with an uncooked chicken, or better yet, wings for the high collagen content. When you start with a rotisserie chicken, you've a lost a lot of the chicken's flavor to the roaster's drip pan.
I prefer the flavor from the already-roasted chicken in my stock, but yeah a raw chicken works just as well. Just needs more cooking time in the pressure cooker. My main point was that making stock at home is a lot faster if you have a pressure cooker.
>Quite often when I visit a great restaurant I find its a sauce that lifts a dish from the good to memorable. I always thought that was because of the stock made from scratch.
Or from knowing exactly what materials or procedures to add to the "school cafeteria" sauce your food service supplier delivers to make it work great with your dish.
I sometimes long for the simplicity of something like Windows Forms.