The point in my career at which I used jq the most was when I was doing a lot of work with Elasticsearch doing exploratory work on indexed data and search results. Doing things such as trying to figure out what sort of values `key` might have, grabbing ids returned, etc.
Second to this, I've mostly used jq to look at OpenAPI/swagger files, again just doing one-off tasks, such as listing all api routes, listing similarly named schemas, etc.
From what I've seen in the companies I've worked for, this is fairly consistent, but naturally I can't speak for everyone's use-cases. At the end of the day, I don't think most people use jq in places where readable or maintainable would be most appropriate.
I installed spacemacs 5ish years ago and have added maybe 20 lines to my configuration since then. None in the past 4 years. It's really overstated the amount of maintenance that Emacs requires.
> So your white collar friends are going to sit and enjoy life while the good times roll but flee the second hard times come.
Seems reasonable. Why would anyone want to spend their last moments bleeding out from avoidable violence?
> If I had a friend that only came over for a BBQ and couldn't be bothered to help me in a time of need, that isn't a friend
For many people the modern relation with the state can be mediated through nationalistic fervor or through comparison of services provided. You seem to see it through the former, so you'll need to exercise some empathy to see the latter.
> The U.S. has invested trillions of dollars building an infrastructure that has led its citizens to being some of the best-educated and most-productive in the world.
Remember what you said: some of the population is capable of doing such things, but a relatively large portion of the population are doing gig work. The distinction isn't "why take the highly skilled segment of the workforce and retrain them," but instead "why not take the 'low-skilled' portion and upskill them." Ultimately we know the answer, but your framing was off.
> I don't see anyone saying to use jQuery for highly interactive applications.
I don't know what to tell you. The first sentence in my comment was a quote and the rest of the comment was responding to say how that quote was misunderstanding the OP.
I never said anyone specifically said to do that, but that, in the metaphor that the OP made, a static website isn't an accurate comparison to a AAA game.
> what's so wrong about sprinkling some jquery on a static website
You're talking past one another. He's speaking in the context of AAA games, and the equivalent of that in the webdev world is a highly interactive application.
> Alas, that won't happen until tech workers (and white collar workers in general) realize they're workers and not capital owners.
Workers though they may be, it is within reach for most programmers to jump on the real estate ladder, heavily invest, and retire comfortably.
> That's the only way you get some negotiating power.
For the duration of this bull market, Software Jobs have been easy to come by. Negotiating power, while never completely in employees favor, has given most programmers the chance to live _far more comfortable lives than anyone else they know or went to school with_.
"Of mice and men," "to kill a mockingbird," "brave new world," "scary stories to tell in the dark," a scattering of biographies from Lucille Ball to Cesar Chavez. That's certainly a lot of cultural heritage to cast aside
> The fact that they don't make those tradeoffs means that no matter what comes out their mouth, they don't want to pay the price of that feature.
The feature may be worth it to a large swath of people, but not at a price-point that producers are capable of offering _for whatever reason_. By applying scale, costs can be reduced, and the feature can come to a more friendly price point which might increase demand.
There's another angle to this which is reduction of externalities, as well, but it's never as clear cut as: caveman spend sea shells on log rather than spending sea shells on rock.
> Discussions have different levels of "safe" viewpoints
You don't have viewpoints, you have cosplays. If you had viewpoints, you'd stick by them. Instead you get to have your cake and eat it: post whatever catches your fancy that particular week and then pretend to be on the posters version of the underground railroad.
You're calling for repression while avoiding responsibility for what you post. Specifically you're calling for nationality-based repression which would affect people who haven't lived in the country for decades or had no meaningful input.
You're just feigning a petty tyrant.
> Can you link to your LinkedIn or other personally identifiable information?
My handle isn't some random assortment of characters and if you Google my name, you will find it all.
> What's your solution to what's going on in Ukraine?
I'm just some idiot with a keyboard, who cares what my opinion is?
Theres something deeply funny about hiding behind a throwaway account while saying that anyone Russian by means of passport ought to be repressed. Cowardly display
> But I don't agree that it should only be people that go to war that should discuss or decide whether we should go to war.
If someone is pro war, they should see their convictions through.
But don't worry: you don't need convictions here on the internet. You can just impotently post, make all the insinuations you want, and then go back to Netflix. The internet is great because you don't have to actually do the hard work of following a belief through, and can instead adopt styles of posting while they're relevant.
> it seems like this further exactrebates it. I put together a weekend project to see how it goes, I have a bug somewhere I didn't think of now BAM I'm on the hook for millions of dollars in "damages."
Judging by the CCC statement, this is more intended for cases of negligence in face of known security problems. It specifically says "unkorrigierten oder gehäuften IT-Sicherheitsproblemen" (uncorrected or accumulating/amassed it security problems).
> If social media is going to be the default communication medium
I don't think this is really true. Most people in the US don't use Twitter. Not to mention that many users are following entertainment based users or aren't fully consuming posts by those they follow.
Twitter is just an additional stream/supplement to town halls, email lists, websites, news coverage, etc.