Firefox is my primary browser, so it doesn't affect me, however this has already caused confusion within the web agency world I work in, both with technical staff and clients.
If we were living in the colonial days, only the British would be calling them "radical" or "extremists". :D
Men of authority pledging not to bow to unconstitutional orders against citizens. Actually seems noble.
I suspect they get the "radical" and "extremist" label from our culture where those who aren't on the "correct" political side are labeled a Nazi or Communist.
FWIW, I knew it was a clever reference to the GOT sword after reading the title. It's obvious the project isn't based on or associated with a group using the same common words. Whether they are actually "extremist" is a different matter.
Like the Stack Overflow survey, this one does not distinguish server-side/client-side JavaScript, making it look far more popular than it actually is when considering the data in context of server-side technologies.
If 100% of the servers were running PHP, the results would likely be 50% PHP, 50% JavaScript.
These survey writers need to modify their question, or add another one specifically requesting server-side tech so JS can be accurately compared with server-side only languages.
The word research is pretty vague in comparison to the context the author interprets its meaning. He over-reaches on his explanation of what a researcher is, and leaves too much of a gap between researcher and tinkerer.
Maybe it's from living in CA all my life, but having ridden many out many quakes, my concern for 'The Big One' is a little less than my concern is for an astroid hit... which isn't much.
I watched the announcement w/o knowing much about it. He justified the decision by saying:
- We're paying 100b/year when other developed countries do not have to.
- Spending on that is unaccounted for.
- The impact will be (only) a 2/10 Celcius reduction in temperature by 2100
- The positive impact by 2030 is the equivalent of what China pollutes in 14 days.
Just stating what was said. I don't know which are facts.
So you are defending them (at least in the first sentence)from your speculation based on what you heard around town, that customers were simply not sustainable fits... Wouldn't it make sense they not offer a service package that is unsustainable in the first place? The clients myself and many others put on Mandrill were certainly not free tier anything, and they still offer the service, just under he Mailchimp name. (point being it can't be too unsustainable if they still offer it)
Customers I know who were ultimately stuck by being heavily integrated in the Mandrill API still suffered issues and downtime with the flawed account migration process. Just about every paying (and non paying) Mandrill customer got screwed in one way or another.
Are you sure the assessment web programming being a series of hacks on hacks isn't an artifact of inheriting a fairly long-lived and large code base?
I don't think I've touched a large codebase that has been around for a long time which didn't feel hackish.
I'd make the evaluation of web programming based on a language and framework that feels most proper to you, and based on the use of it with a brand new app.