The article seems to be about Java vs Python. But it really only talks about static vs dynamic typing. Not only has everything about that subject already been said 1000 times. It's also not Java-specific. Java sucks IMO not because of static typing, but because of the 'If you have a problem, add more OOP'-mentality which has given us Java EE. About any argument he makes pro-java is also valid for something like typescript. But with typescript you still have the freedom of a scripting language for the parts where it makes sense.
Unfortunately, the situation hasn't improved much. Besides, even if you get it set up, the quality of the recognition isn't even close to the one from Google.
The main reason there is a fetish for these micropackages is a fetish for github stars. The formula seems to be: Overly generic + Simple + Javascript = Lots of stars.
That being said, there is something to be said for using these micropackages. Left padding a string is easy, but you might just have forgotten about that one edge case where in browser X and language Y you have to do things different. It's not really the case here, but things that seem simple at first often turn out to be hard because of some edge cases. One might hope these edge cases are solved if they use a library.
Javascript is in fact special because it's one of the few languages where the developer can't choose the version of the language to use. It's dictated by users with 4 year old browsers.
Only: there's no real-time db support like what Meteor with livequery does. The term 'real-time' is abused a lot here. Not only does neither Meteor, nor feathers offer real-time in the real meaning of the word. A better word is 'reactive'. But feathers just provides the very basic infrastructure (basically just websockets). Meteor also supports any type of DB, but only Mongo comes with reactivity... (Although their 'apollo' project is looking to change this).
Actually, for most use cases, newest update wins is sufficient if it can be done on a fine granular basis (one property of an object/document).
It's what web applications have been doing for forever and being a 'realtime' framework doesn't change this if your use case isn't something like google docs.
1) Do we know if it will be more widespread? Although the stronger stuff is also illegal in the Netherlands, it's very easy to find and I don't think the Netherlands have more drug addicts then another country (no source for this, just my opinion how I know the country).
2) Is it a problem if it's more widespread? Some stronger stuff can be used responsibly (for example MDMA). Just like only a small portion of alcohol users have alcohol problems. You also got stronger stuff like heroin which is very addictive, but then there's still common sense. Whether it's legal or illegal, I can get it very easily where I live. Yet, I don't take it because I know it's not good for me.
Here in Europe, I asked around to some firms like Aston Carter and Computerfutures recently. They had 0 requests from customers for React and A LOT for angular. Now these work mainly for enterprise companies which are hard to convince of a new technology. So all of these companies will transition much easier to angular 2 (just because they know the name 'angular') then to react.
Basically they're saying: "To succeed you need to have an awesome idea that hasn't been done before. You need a great team and build a great product your users will love".
Wow, thanks for the advice, why didn't I think of that.
The problem is not with having public urls. The problem is with public urls that don't have enough random numbers or if these numbers aren't generated by a CSPRNG.
They didn't really have a business model to begin with, they were one of those "let's create a hype and see what happens" startups, led by a guy who thinks of himself as another Steve Jobs. The problem is that their framework was buggy and not really that high performing (the idea of adding matrix transforms on every single dom element is actually not such a good idea at all). If you really wanted a very animated GUI, native is still the only option. Plus, the whole over-animated GUI trend is also starting to fade (do we really need our apps to look like flash intros of the 90s?).
Later I've heard they were aiming for a flash-like IDE for their framework to generate money, this might be somewhat in line with what they're trying now. On reddit a developer who left famo.us only 6 weeks ago said he didn't know anything about this project. So I think that they are running out of money quickly and this is all made up very fast without yet having a real product or example apps.