I loved that language. I actually forked it, used it for a lot of stuff, bloated it (started by just trying to port to x86-64, ended up with a mini-FORTH with regexes, FFI to C, etc.). I still use it every day, though mostly for doing math in hex.
Looks like you are correct, yeah, and the raw logs show 7,410 of the 10,729 live instances have it. Lemme hack it in real quick; I can't put it onto the big pages and not sure how well adding another column to that table will work, but give me like five minutes.
That'd be cool, but it just uses publicly available APIs for this. Most of the data like that isn't reported through the public APIs across various types of software. Bad data is tossed out (e.g., the you-think-your-fake-numbers-are-impressive.well-this-instance-contains-all-living-humans.lubar.me lists over 7 billion accounts) but data that is (as far as I know) accurate is presented as-is.
This applies if you're thinking of Twitter as a business or as a tool for mass-broadcast. If you think of something with a similar format but that fits a different space, that's the use for the Fediverse: it's more like USENET or BBSs or even 2008 Twitter than it is like 2022 Twitter.
The main advantage of tools like this are that you can use them to communicate. When I don't have the need to do that, I don't use them. I try to use tools that will remember this sort of thing on their own.
I keep notes on ideas in a personal wiki (AwkiAwki), and I open up the recent changes page to remember what I was taking notes about. For anything past the planning or brainstorming stages, I just use `ls -t|sed 10q` on my directory full of editor session dumps. I always keep a scratch/memo buffer open in acme so there will be some brief notes, an outline of the behavior I planned to implement, or (more often) I can gather what was going on from which files were open and where the cursor is in those files. For non-code projects, there will at least be some text, so there will be a session dump.
Forth isn't super practical in such an environment; gForth in particular is a bit "large". (Not that this is bad, but it's of the second school the article mentions.)
If you wanted, you could cobble together a Forth implementation that played nicely with pipes. I did this, it works fine, but it's not the type of environment that matches Forth very well.
Forth's design is to give you the machine and let you compute with it rather than to act as part of a pipeline.
Stock Scheme does not have much in the way of interfaces to the outside world (long story) but there are several Scheme variants where people are doing larger projects. Racket is sort of a Scheme variant, and it seems to be the most popular, but Chicken and Guile are also pretty popular (as far as Scheme variants go) for real-world use cases.
Not a false dichotomy at all. Ignoring that the size of the team is exactly two (and there's only so much you can keep in your head), when you have a metric, you optimize for it. It's not even a conscious process.
Well, PG presents them as different bets, one of which paid off. They were the same essential bet from Newton's perspective. For example, books on physics at the time referred to religion heavily, sometimes as a cornerstone of an argument. Even Newton's Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica says "Collocavit igitur Deus Planetas in diversas distantiis à Sole, ut quilibet pro gradu densitatis calore Solis majore vel minore fruatur."
There wasn't quite the sharp division of disciplines, either. Thinking about it that way comes from the public school system (which the author ought to know, because if I'm not mistaken, he mentioned that in a previous essay). Mathematics (which didn't warrant a mention as a bet that paid off in a blurb about the guy that invented calculus), metaphysics, and the natural sciences were all areas of study, but they weren't different bets: they were interrelated components of our understanding of the universe.
At the risk of getting downvoted myself, I wonder why all of your comments are getting downvoted. Is it such a terrible opinion that it doesn't even belong on HN? A lot of people turn off syntax highlighting. It can be legitimately distracting, and it messes up tooling.
Unfortunate that it's just a link to an image on Twitter, but not entirely surprising. Kicking off a thread to manage stdio is the usual solution, since even polling requires a syscall, which requires memory to change hands, which bumps latency some.
It was a good thing. Not just for the standardization bodies, for everyone. The "Fierce Idiocy of 'New!'"[1] died down for a little while and briefly it was possible to rely on a stable development environment. Features are great if they're the correct ones and they're done well, but stability and reliability are even nicer.
The OS doesn't power down the antenna while there are open network connections. Did your tests wait long enough to turn off the antenna, was the test environment clean (i.e., nothing else using the network on the device, including your tests)?
Definitely performance is a nice benefit. I don't use AdBlock; I have a few thousand lines in my /etc/hosts that map various bad actors (vast chunks of Javascript that doesn't do anything useful, 1x1 .gifs, ads, annoying widgets, etc.) to 255.255.255.255 (NXDOMAIN), and use dnsmasq on that machine to get that benefit across to the rest of the local network, regardless of browser. The thing that usually triggers another bout of "block these hosts" is if I notice that my ostensibly idle browser is burning CPU. I don't want to wait several seconds for a page to render, and I certainly don't want to waste laptop battery time on refreshing an iframe with "what people are saying about this on Twitter" or feeding someone's analytics server. Half the time a site runs really slowly, it's usually doing some nonsense that I'd be happier without, or my browser is waiting to download something that I don't need to see.
The total amount of Javascript in kB is one issue, but you don't need to hit the level of opcodes, I think. Counting the nodes in the parsetree would be useful, as well as measuring the amount of memory that is allocated by the Javascript, determining whether it runs once or continuously or on some trigger (e.g., scrolling, hovering, mouse movement). If you ran a profiler and measured the amount of time spent in the Javascript bits of your runtime (e.g., how long to parse the JS, how long to eval it, how often it runs, throw in some memory profiling) you could probably get some interesting numbers.