IMO React started going off the rails when they introduced hooks. The number of concepts you needed to learn started growing, and the old intuitiveness of React began to go away. On top of that, there was a mad rush throughout the ecosystem to implement them, many times poorly, leading to more confusion. RSC seems to be history repeating itself.
I've had the complete opposite experience. Neither YAML or TOML are very obvious to me. I always have to double and triple check that my syntax does what I assume it will do. I never have that problem with JSON.
Indeed, without clicking into it, my first thought was "why would anyone pay for free documentation?", but notifications in itself are actually pretty useful for web developers to stay on top of the landscape.
I've also never downloaded a PWA before, but using it for docs actually makes a lot of sense. I like to look things up on my phone as I think about them throughout the day when I'm not at the computer, and a PWA should make this a lot faster and reliable.
Airpods are by far the worst Apple product I've ever owned, for all the same reasons the author listed. I genuinely don't understand how they can still say they Airpods are "fantastic" and "wonderful".
I would say on average I encounter these issues 50% of the time. Most of my day is doing Zoom calls and either myself or the other party (using Airpods as well) will spend the first 30-60 seconds either switching out for another pair of headphones or trying to get theirs to connect.
I'm sure most of these issues actually have to do with Bluetooth, but the criticism still stands. Have we just convinced ourselves that they're great for some mysterious reason?
It isn't valid to complain about the code breaking. At least not with any consequences. Because the license explicitly says that the software is provided without warranty.
Likewise, the license explicitly says that the software is provided for free, therefore it isn't valid to complain about people not paying for it.
Nobody's on the side of the big corps here, but "why aren't you paying for this thing that I've given to everyone explicitly for free" seems nonsensical.
I assume you mean "take a penny" = "use the software for free" and "leave a penny" = "contribute back" (money or time).
With the plate there's a sign that says both "take" and "leave". In this case there is also a sign (the license) which only says "take". The intent is clear in both.
It's further not comparable because taking a literal penny deprives the next person of it, whereas here using the software for free costs the other users nothing.
But I'm not trying to nitpick the analogy, I only want to point out the the obligations (both social and contractual) are not the same, neither are the consequences.
Again, if he wanted to make money from his software, he should've put it in the license and charged the big users for it.
AITA for thinking that if you develop open-source software and your license permits anyone to use it for free, then complaining about no compensation is not a valid complaint?
I totally understand that billionaire corporations use software like this for free. But the software maintainer has explicitly allowed _anyone_ to use it for free. If you don't want them to use it for free, license it as such.
There are a lot of efforts to topple Disqus for precisely those reasons. I released my Disqus competitor 2 years ago and its userbase has continued to grow like clockwork every day. It may seem like a saturated market on the low end, but there's a real need for projects like these!
I inherited a betta fish from my friend who traveled too much. She kept him in a 1 gallon tank. He always "seemed" depressed, always staying inside his little house thing. So I made it my mission to try to make this fish as happy as I could.
It never felt quite right to keep him in such a small space, so I bought a 5 gallon tank, and put in a (fake) plant. After the initial shock of the new environment, he seemed to really like his plant and I'd sometimes find him hiding between the leaves. But still to this day he rarely swims around. He still spends most of his time inside his house, though I every so often find him playing up at the top. 95% of the time he's stationary inside his house.
Next I'm going to try introducing some vines that hang down from the top to see if that coaxes him up. But it all makes me wonder if fish can incur long-term trauma or depression. Who knows how long he sat on the shelf of the pet store in a tiny cup? Did it affect his mental health? Or is it simply his "personality" (fishonality?) to be a homebody. I sure am.
I don't know, but this article kind of vindicates my train of thought.
I don't know if this holds up so well for 500 Internal Server Errors, since these are usually indicative of something unexpected and needing to be fixed on the server.
Usually a client retrying a 500 error is the expected behavior, since over time that 500 error will tend to become some other status once the problem is addressed.
One of these "You probably don't need [popular technology x]" articles comes out pretty often now. I understand what the message is (don't use tech just because it's popular, but pick the right tool for the job). But I always wondered why these types of articles are titled to be dismissive ("you probably don't need x") rather than representative of their actual content ("here's when to use x").
I've used OpenTracing before with good results. Though at the time, 3rd party support (like DataDog etc.) was lacking, and we didn't really want to host our own Jaeger install.
I didn't know OpenCensus was a thing, but I hope this merger means that adoption spreads. A lot of cloud providers provide their own tracing, and it would be nice if they were all compatible.
I've had a weird ride in my lifetime from upper-middle class => poor => lower middle-class => finally working my way back to upper. From that perspective, I wouldn't agree with either statement.
I wouldn't say I was ever discouraged from entrepreneurship, even at my lowest. But it did make the math a hell of a lot harder. When you're poor, there's always something more you can lose. Choosing between investing in your business or what you eat that week is a difficult decision.
What I would say is that those circumstances give you the motivation to find the clever, efficient solutions, and to make wiser, less risk-adverse decisions. I never wanted a startup that burned money just to get acquired. I wanted one that could make me real money from the very beginning.
Being poor raises the bar on the quality of the business you intend to create, because failure is worse for you than anyone else.