Diesel555

That's kind of what I was getting at. We all have the same standard and can reach the same level of stress no matter where we started based on a plus or minus from where we started..... or is that false and we just think our life is hard and have no idea the magnitude of difficulty that others live in.

I did mention that he was in a country that had been at war in my post. Hence my question.

Not true. This topic is more complex then simply replacing the F-22 with F-35 as most government decisions on multi-million dollar projects with state interests in mind are.

The F-22 was cancelled because the military thought that they didn't needed to spend the money on air superiority fighters and wanted to use the money elsewhere (drones and bombers). I don't think the F-35 was in the discussion that much... they fired the top leaders of the Air Force at this time.

Robert Gates killed the F-22 and fired the chief of staff of the Air Force Moseley and secretary Wynne. Since then we knew it was a mistake and tried to restart the F-22 line. It didn't make sense for cost.

Gates has his own book Duty which references this quite a bit and is a great political read https://www.amazon.com/Duty-Memoirs-Secretary-at-War/dp/0307...

And there is another book that argues it was a bad idea. https://www.amazon.com/Air-Power-Abandoned-Betrayal-Americas...

Also:

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20472/retired-general-...

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2018/05/10...

This one is funny because they talk about the increased costs of the B-2 due to cutting it early..... as they cut the F-22.

https://www.airforcemag.com/schwartz-in-memoir-says-f-22-was...

The AWACS for an F-35 in terms of providing an air picture is less necessary. They are still command and control and provide services which may not be radar related. They have lots of people that can process data and taskings. So don't let the idea that they are being used with an AWACS mean they require an AWACS.

And for the space discussion, nothing is as real time as a fighter's sensors airborne, it's pretty bad how long some data can take to reach a platform that can use that data. The military has a problem right now with distributing data real time, they are working to solve that problem. You can find a lot of articles on the ABMS. https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2336618/adva...

"Unfortunately, Apple became the place that I lost feeling of physical and psychological safety and the terror that it inflicted on me has impacted me on such a core level that the painful memories and flashbacks have replaced my dreams and they will hunt me until I am alive."

I really don't understand this. I'm not saying this from a perspective that they are wrong, but that I honestly don't get it, please help me understand it. My response is about ambition related stress.

I've had experiences in war torn countries and seen those that are drastically less fortunate than the author. For the author to say that they have terror and flashbacks that will hunt them.... is this just a perspective thing? The author mentions twice he had been in a war related country.

Is it a self imposed stress to do well that is greater than the stress that those in poverty and war stricken countries deal with? Is it all relative? I feel like there is real stress involved with ambition from reading this.

I mean this honestly, I read this post and feel this is a first world problem post. What am I missing?

While I do agree with the original post, I don't like the verbiage "undeniably a good thing" as they are saying there is no denying that what I am saying is true. And to think you know everything about an issue means you aren't willing to listen to different view points. Nothing I ever say is undeniable.

I'm convinced that people would generally not place success above morals when isolated. But a corporation isn't a person and without regulation and oversight it will do this every time. Some will transition faster than others. Some will find success in morals (Apple's privacy policy) - but in the end it's a means to success over just doing the right thing.

OBOGS is terrible. We fly OBOGS and non OBOGS aircraft of the same type. Everytime I fly OBOGS I cough all day. Liquid Oxygen - it's great.

I don't disagree, but I do wish there was a more formalized way to educate both bikers and drivers on the laws. I just saw the Washington DC official bike map has the laws on it, but others do not. And what use are the laws if the drivers don't know them? Both bikers and drivers need to know them to be successful.

I've asked a good number of both bikers and drivers in my area and they don't know that the laws exist:

A driver must move over to the next lane if it is open and a biker is in the bike lane or the lane the driver is in.

A driver must not pass closer than 3 feet from a biker

A biker may take an entire lane and ride two wide

I think if drivers knew that the above rules, and it became a norm to take the entire lane when 3 feet was impossible based on the size of the lane, then biking would be safer.

To not leave this as a "this is bad" without proposing how to fix it... the education could be incorporated into gaining your drivers license, city sponsored advertisements, or having police actively spend a period of time enforcing the above laws (warnings would be fine, more for education than penalty)... or all 3.

>He doesn’t get mad. Or if he does, he keeps it to himself.

There is something to that.

I'm curious about when open source coders transition from enjoying sharing their product to feeling obligated to support their product to wanting some form of monetization when supporting their product becomes a job. Is it normally companies causing this or unrealistic expectations?

I know myself, when I put something in open source I feel a responsibility to maintain it for no reasonable reason.

Is anyone else amazed that we are sending data to a satellite orbiting in space and getting a response that is 50-100 times faster (down) than the T1 links (1.544 mbps) our schools paid crazy amounts for when I was in high school almost 20 years ago? I mean that's pretty cool when you look at what Space X has done.

Source please? Honestly curious, on one now.

I'm surprised at all the people that prefer REST over GraphQL.

I'm a developer of my own projects for fun. I don't work in tech. My frontends are on iOS / Android / the web with Typescript. So my confusion is from a perspective without expertise.

I started with REST via Django and a few others, and now I've switched to GraphQL. I love GraphQL over REST backends due to the type automation tools such as GraphQL Code Generator and query tools like Apollo. Also being able to construct a query and access children via one request is super nice. For example my old REST APIs call for a post, then get pictures for that post, then get comments for that post, then gets the username and other user data for the owner that made the comment. It's four requests. My GraphQL requests just get them all in one customizable request. Post can contain pictures and comments and all their properties. Comments can contain the owner of the comment and all its properties to include things like username.

The result is a typescript object that is strongly typed and has all the data I need. Before GraphQL, in REST, this would be four requests, three of which are in series (post -> comment -> owner to get username). I know I could make a custom REST API to do the same thing, but it was just so easy in GraphQL, I didn't have to worry about it.

I'm not working in teams, I'm not creating a super large backend, it's not complex projects... so I don't know what I don't know.

But what am I missing? Maybe not everyone needs / uses the typing I do? That's the big benefit for me. Maybe not everyone cares about being able to query children (or create children via a nested create)? Maybe these things were easier than how I was doing it in REST?

Agreed, I don't think we'll ever see this because most people don't care. I'd guess greater than 95% of people, really 99% of people, couldn't tell you the difference between HTTP and HTTPS.

It just should work for them, and the browser should enforce it. I think the tech world is biased to think consumers are more technically inclined due to the people they are around. I do not work in computer tech. No-one I work with, all of whom have some form of an engineering degree unrelated to computers, could tell you the difference or care less.

Yes, but arguing we didn’t already do something so we shouldn’t start now isn’t right.

I know that isn’t your point, and agreed on the WTO. As a mass we will never sacrifice a 10% cheaper product to stop inhumanities. We need to elect officials who will handle that via economics. I’ve always been a fan of taxing Chinese imports to offset this factor.

If only we can just keep partisan politics out of the discussions as the taxes on Chinese products were immediately bashed based on the person who implemented it. We need to look at the decision itself to evaluate it, not the party that made the decision. We can disagree with most of a party’s decisions but if you find you hate 100% of them you are likely applying a bias to something that may be good.

Check out Crouching Tiger. It’s a great modern book that includes how we are buying/trading our way into losing the next war.

Relatable to a lot of people in the military. Pretty much every visit is with a new person who doesn't know you, they just know the record they reviewed minutes before.

My load time was not perceptible. It was telling me to draw before I could mentally register the page.

I like the F-16 logo on the homepage. Sleek minimal airplane to represent fast with a nice outline.

This has to be a machine.

You can't just pick one thing Joe said, that someone else didn't say, and use that as an argument. That's almost always going to be true. What are the chances Eminem would talk about trans woman MMA fighting? I'd argue very very low. The fact Eminem didn't say this obscure quote doesn't discount the OP pointing out a hypocrisy.

I could easily take one of many Eminem quotes (I found a few... but not appropriate to post here) and say "Joe never said that."

I'm not taking a stance on one side or another here for the original post, just pointing out a bad argument.

I tried WebStorm and made myself use it for 2 months. I went back to VSCode. WebStorm had its positives. I realized how much I hate setting up debugging environments in VSCode and how well they work in WebStorm, especially Node. I really liked the refactoring. But in the end, I preferred VSCode. I had performance issues (the team was fixing them and fixed some), scroll wasn't as nice, it ran worse on large files, the extensions weren't as nice in my opinion. Maybe I'll try it again in a few years.

It sounds like you are disappointed in what people who are in the modern church, publicly speaking that you have access to, are saying. There will obviously be an availability bias on how we each perceive the "modern church".

If you don't believe in what the Bible says, then disregard everything below.

Try reading the Bible. As a whole. And if you have, do it again. Don't let individual versus taken out of context influence major decisions. Know who wrote each chapter (if we know that), who they were writing to, and why they wrote that chapter to put everything in context. I found I was reading too fast and missing major parts. Also translation makes a big deal - some words just don't translate properly - and a good Bible will have footnotes to explain the original word. There are lots of plans out there.

Then, I think, you will realize that what those in the modern church you are referencing are saying should disappoint all of us... and it's not in alignment with the Bible and Jesus' teachings, and you can see where they don't align. Not all churches are that way. Anyways go to the source (if you haven't already).

I agree with this partially. I have had very good feedback from the reviewers when my app was rejected. I could find and fix their issues, I may not agree with it, but the terms were clear.

Also... I've submitted a minor bug fix and got flagged on something I did not change that was previously approved and their terms did not change. That gets frustrating. I feel like every update is a gamble. Some parts of it seem pretty vague. Sometimes I just resubmit and get a new reviewer and he approves on the iffy ones. But with people in the loop interpretation is always a thing and I can't get too mad over it.

Building weapons is immoral? Tell that to the WW2 industrial complex that supported the war.

Not building weapons for the war effort is not always right. That is an intentional double negative because I think it's the most clear if you read it twice. Building weapons for the war effort is sometimes right would be the boolean negative of that statement.

>Microsoft executives have literally decided to build actual weapons.

Yep. Literally they did. Clearly all US weapons are evil in your opinion because you disagree with all US weapon usage I'm guessing? You have to combine the argument that they are literally making weapons with the fact that those weapons are being used in a way you don't agree with.

Keep in mind that most of these advanced weapons they are literally making are not designed against the current wars you most likely disagree with. They are built, to include AI, to keep pace with advanced threats from other countries. Allowing us to fall behind technologically, due to perceived moral black/white issues of current wars, could lead to a whole new world in 40 years as you make your arguments in a well protected environment. Not researching advanced topics will lead to an asymmetric fight... not in our favor... if the enemy so chooses.

Reference our usage of nuclear weapons. If you think that was evil, then you wouldn't want an evil country / group of people to gain such an asymmetric advantage. If you think it was necessary, then you want to have an asymmetric advantage when it is necessary against an evil group. Yes I recognize the inherent cyclical issue with the above statement. Either way, allowing all people to gain an asymmetric advantage while we just discard all research in hopes that others will follow is ignorant of history - war theory is a thing.

From Dan Abramov from the React team yesterday https://twitter.com/dan_abramov/status/1290289129255624706

> We’ve reached peak complexity with SPA. The pendulum will swing a bit back to things on the server. But it will be a new take — a hybrid approach with different tradeoffs than before. Obviously I’m thinking React will be a part of that wave.

Combine that with NextJS's new features in server side rendering, I think we are going back to that. My React site is server side rendered.

It's like the Taliban and the Toyota Hilux

Quick google search gives lots of results on this, here's one: https://www.wearethemighty.com/tech/how-the-white-toyota-hil...

> And then there's a swath of conservatives that don't think they're racist

You do realize you are taking a gigantic group of people and classifying them all as having some property without knowing the person at all, sounds discriminatory.

And realize you used the word conservative, not Republican, so don't base it on policy decisions that people support as we all known Republicans do not represent conservative policies in most cases you are concerned about. These are two different things which are not inclusive or mutually exclusive.

Visual Basic, strict mode.

Our last 9X shot in combat? https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/news/a270...