> Employee Only: You cannot buy these in stores. They are sold exclusively to ASML employees with a strictly enforced “one per person” rule.
Wonder if they include this lego set as a gift with their real machines? Or are they like – our commercial agreement is worth $400M and not a lego set above that.
All this reactionary outrage in the comments is funny. And lame.
Yes, for the vast majority of the internet, serving traffic is near zero marginal cost. Not for LLMs though – those requests are orders of magnitude more expensive.
This isn't controversial at all, it's a well understood fact, outside of this irrationally angry thread at least. I don't know, maybe you don't understand the economic term "marginal cost", thus not understanding the limited scope of my statement.
If such DDOSes as you mention were common, such a scraping strategy would not have worked for the scraper at all. But no, they're rare edge cases, from a combination of shoddy scrapers and shoddy website implementations, including the lack of even basic throttling for expensive-to-serve resources.
The vast majority of websites handle AI traffic fine though, either because they don't have expensive to serve resources, or because they properly protect such resources from abuse.
If you're an edge case who is harmed by overly aggressive scrapers, take countermeasures. Everyone with that problem should, that's neither new nor controversial.
Scraping static content from a website at near-zero marginal cost to its server, vs scraping an expensive LLM service provided for free, are different things.
The former relies on fairly controversial ideas about copyright and fair use to qualify as abuse, whereas the latter is direct financial damage – by your own direct competitors no less.
It's fun to poke at a seeming hypocrisy of the big bad, but the similarity in this case is quite superficial.
It's a great language, I've been working with it for 10 years now. Full stack Scala with Scala.js on the frontend is so very nice. My experience is mostly in fintech & healthcare startups where the language helped us get correctness, refactorability, clarity, and high velocity at the same time without blowing up the team size.
Initially I learned Scala on the job, but I've been writing open source Scala for years since then. It's a cool language to learn and explore ideas in, since it has lots of elegantly integrated features (especially FP + OOP).
Scala may not be the #1 most popular language, and that's fine. Popular stuff surely gets the benefits of funding and attention, and sometimes lacking such support is really annoying, like a few years ago when Scala 3 was first released, the IDEs took a looong time to catch up. But I still choose Scala despite those occasional annoyances, even though I also have years of experience in JS / TS and other languages. It's just a much better tool for my needs.
^ This meme is from 10+ years ago when Scala was at the peak of its hype driven by the FP craze. Nobody seriously writes cryptic-symbolic-operator code like that nowadays. Scalaz, the FP library most notorious for cryptic operator/method names, hasn't been relevant for many years. Today everyone uses Cats, ZIO, or plain Tapir or Play, all of which are quite ergonomic.
Surely we can distinguish MacOS – the operating system – from the online services provided by Apple that happen to have a native app?
If you are choosing to use Apple online services, sure, you'll get upsells I guess, as with any other online service. I don't use any of Apple's online services, and never see those ads.
I know all about their business models, yet I couldn't care less how much money Facebook gets from ad clicks. Them making a profit is not directly harming me.
The things that are harming me are a lot more complicated than that, but people don't have the attention span to be educated about such complex issues. It's easier than ever to spread "education" now. The fact that it doesn't stick is not some grand conspiracy – most people simply don't care.
The main reason for populism is that the incumbent governments do a consistently poor job satisfying their constituents' preferences and interests, so people get desperate to find something / someone different that might work better. Always has been, always will be, social media or not.
We haven't invented a governance structure yet that would be immune to this, although some are better than others. I'm sure the current social media algorithms are harmful as well. You can ban viral algorithms, but the hostile actors whose literal job it is to drive polarization / populism will just find other strategies to effectively deliver their message.
"Education" is nice and all, but millions of people keep smoking despite the obvious harm and decades of education, not to mention the many limitations, taxes, and bans. I mention smoking as an obviously-bad-thing that everyone knows is bad. Education succeeded, and yet, here we are, still puffing poison. But you can also look already-polarized political topics. There's been no shortage of education on those topics either, but if that worked well enough, we wouldn't be decrying populism right now.
How is MacOS as enshittified as Windows? It doesn't have ads, doesn't push AI on you, their online services are trivial to ignore once and never think about again, etc. I haven't tried Tahoe, and sure, its new glass UI is shit, but merely incompetent UI design is not "enshittification" and is not in any way equivalent to what Microsoft does in Windows.
When I append "reddit" to my google search query, I'm not looking for "disagreement and debate". I'm looking for specific information on non-political topics, such as repairing my car, finding a good product in the sea of garbage, or learning new techniques. Such topics are typically discussed cooperatively rather than adversarially. For this stuff, consensus-seeking is a feature not a bug, and where the consensus appears inadequate, I'm well capable of looking past the top post. Reddit's format is not perfect, but it's better than having to read through a 30-page thread in which most messages are irrelevant to most other messages. Such threads are linear only artificially through a UI that hides the structure of the underlying conversations.
If you don't like the upvotes aspect of reddit, we could settle on the same nested format but without sorting by upvotes. But with forums, we don't even have that.
Reddit's comments aren't one-liners because Reddit's format encourages that, it's because it's the most popular site where everyone goes. If forums were as widely popular, they would see the same people making the same comments there too.
The authenticity of old fashioned forums is often outweighed by their poor UX and in general terrible ergonomics. It's no wonder that so few people want to use them anymore. Reddit's "nested, collapsible comments sorted by upvotes" format is simply superior.
20 years after Reddit started, the best that the forums can offer is perhaps discourse.org, which is barely any better than traditional forums – sleeker UI for sure, but it's still fundamentally the same unworkable linear format. It's like sticking to magnetic tapes in the age of SSDs.
Even Facebook, one of the dumbest discussion platforms, has nested comments. Terribly implemented of course, but how does the platform designed for the lowest-common-denominator kind of user have more advanced discussion features than forums made for discussion connoisseurs? It is utterly baffling.
> Comparing React to Web components is comparing apples to oranges.
I mean, yes, but you're the one making this comparison, saying that WCs lack reactivity etc.
Web Components are an extension of the DOM – a low level browser API. They are similarly low level. That's expected. I don't need or expect them to be something more.
I am happy that I can use any reactivity system I want to implement a Web Component. That's a feature, not a bug. Having implemented a reactivity system myself, I know that there isn't a perfect one, the design is full of tradeoffs, and I'd rather not have a blessed implementation in the browser, because it will inevitably turn out to be flawed, yet we won't be able to retire it because "we can't break the web". A blessed implementation like that would benefit from network effects just like React does, and would have all the same problems as React, plus the inability to rapidly innovate due to the browser's unique backwards compatibility concerns. I'd rather ship an extra 3KB and avoid all those problems.
> If you don't want that, you gotta bring a wrapper or another reactivity library/framework.
Being able to use a different library with a component, instead of the component being tied to React, is the whole point.
React isn't 100x more popular because its reactivity system or any other feature is 100x better. Half the reason it's popular is network effects – too many frontend components / libraries are made React-only even though they don't need to be React-specific.
Those network effects are the trap, not the reactivity system that's as good as any other for the purpose of writing a Web Component. If you don't want to use simple and small tools like Lit.js, that's fine, but that's your choice, not a limitation of Web Components.
The point of Web Components is not to provide a blessed state management or virtual DOM implementation that will have to stay in JS stdlib forever, it's to make the components you author compatible with most / all UI libraries. For that goal, I don't know of a better solution.
Preferred syntax is whatever looks nicer to you. It's not really two different syntaxes, just one more flexible syntax where if you choose to go full braceless, it ends up looking like python. I personally like the new braceless python-like syntax.
Scala has two main camps, one is purist FP (cats / zio / etc.), another is plain Scala, banking on ergonomic OOP+FP fusion. Neither of those is the default. FP advocates are more vocal online but that's because they need a bunch of libraries (thus more OSS work) to make that approach work, whereas the other camp just uses plain Scala and simpler libraries that aren't reinvented every 5 years, so their online presence is not as apparent.
Scala is very much alive, it's just past the initial hype stage, well into the slope of enlightenment / plateau of productivity depending on which style of Scala one is into. It's now growing slower but based on more sustainable pragmatism instead of just hype.
The problem with overly abstract concepts is a problem of specific Scala functional programming libraries, and not of the Scala language itself, or of other, simpler Scala libraries (e.g. com-lihaoyi stuff, Play, my own Laminar on the frontend, etc.)
If you need to know category theory concepts like Monad / Semigroup / etc. in order to understand your code, you're not doing regular Scala, you're doing Haskell-style FP in Scala. Which is a popular choice that many people swear by, but is entirely optional. Personally I don't think the complexity of that approach is worth it, and we don't use any of that stuff at work, and still reap the benefits of Scala.
Scala is a true multi-paradigm language, it does not have a monoculture. Lots of people who use Scala don't use highly abstract FP libraries. I very much don't think that the OOP side of Scala is the language designers' concession for the sake of broad appeal. Seamless fusion of FP and OOP is the essence of Scala, and it works great for that without any third party libraries. The designers' attitude is evidenced by the libraries created by their companies (e.g. Play, Akka) and by the learning materials, both of which lean heavily on plain Scala without going off the deep end with FP libs.
Kotlin's adoption is not that much bigger than Scala, and it's no good to me, as it's heavily concentrated in the Android world, which is irrelevant to me. Among other things, that means that Kotlin.js is not as good as Scala.js, both itself and in terms of the ecosystem – and the quality of Scala.js is half the reason I'm using Scala in the first place.
Kotlin as a language is also closer to Java on the Haskell <---> Scala <---> Java spectrum. We just don't want to move in either direction on that spectrum, Scala sits perfectly where it makes sense to us.
It's interesting that some people here are saying that Java's recent improvements will eat into Scala's market, when actually, it seems that it will eat into Kotlin first.
Wonder if they include this lego set as a gift with their real machines? Or are they like – our commercial agreement is worth $400M and not a lego set above that.