MrOwnPut

I don't agree, even when the large majority dropped out, all but one didn't have a double digit polling percentage.

In the end it was Ted Cruz with 22%, so you can assume most of the no-trumpers coalesced behind him (because he was one of the few non-dynasties).

Even that is miniscule. The 3rd R (when there were 3 remaining) had 6.5% at their peak...

Trump remained the clear majority, maintaining a 75% majority until the end.

> he very likely engaged in some kind of fraud

So you are assuming guilt before innocence? Based on what? The charges haven't even been unsealed.

He ran against like 17 Republicans, including major political dynasties like the Bush's. He easily swept the primaries...

Then in the generals he went and flipped Pennsylvania and won more counties than any R since Reagan.

You can look at the turnout and total votes to see it blows away your "weak candidate" argument.

I just don't think America likes dynasties or the political establishment. You can see it from grassroot campaigns like Reagan and Trump.

Most of the time they get shoved in your face and there's no choice, but when there is a popular alternative, it's a clear choice.

You can support a basic food aid while also supporting private food production.

I didn't interpret GP to say "total state ownership over food production".

Their keywords were "basic" and "minimally required".

That should have told you that they were supporting food programs where basic foods are guaranteed.

None of that means they support "total", as you say, nationalization of food production.

History has shown us that nationalization of food production leads to the starvation and death of millions.

Free market production has led countries to excess foods, such as grain, which can be and is shipped across the world to combat global starvation.

"Bard can explain why large language models might make mistakes"

Dat not so subtle passive aggressiveness, lol.

I disagreed with the GPs premise and I commented my viewpoint. This is how a forum works.

I disagree with how you summed it up, but I don't really care to continue.

It's getting too dramatic and not really about the tech at this point.

Yes and that is nice, it'll allow future import map support, like in the browser, which is inline with Deno's goal of using browser APIs instead of proprietary ones.

But the package.json format part is a backwards compatibility feature. The preferred import maps will be the ideal solution (if you do need dependency management).

None of that really goes against direct imports, which work well for single file scripts, workers, etc. Choose what fits.

Personally I don't really care about the faux drama.

I'm glad I can use direct url imports in simple Deno scripts.

I also see the need for import maps for larger projects.

I do think node_modules is an abomination and glad I don't have to deal with them anymore.

I prefer writing everything that works in Deno and the browser, not Node specific APIs.

I like the tech, I don't really care about the drama, and I doubt the Ryan does either lol.

I didn't say if "adoption doesn't take off" I said "fully overtakes node".

Should no other browser be invested in because Chrome has the largest market share?

Should no-one ever invest in a competing product?

I believe it is up to his investors what the expected growth rate and market share is.

The difference in your analogy is he is currently working on an alternative (a good one imo), not only talking about it...

His product is currently out there, popular, and already infinitely better than node (imo).

I'm sorry you never "hit gold again", but you seem jaded and projecting that onto others.

Who cares if it never fully overtakes node? It's a great alternative. Competition is good.

I'd consider Deno a success already, it growing in popularity is always nice, but the tech already works.

Could you point out a few things in the blog that made it sound that way to you?

It states many times it was added for backwards compatibility.

Even at the bottom of TFA they annotate the ideal solution (which will be implemented soon) is to use import maps instead of package.json, the same format the browser uses, which is in line with Deno's main goals.

> His point was that the mere ability was the issue

Can you elaborate?

> so they're going against their original values because they know what they wanted isn't what the broader community wants.

No, they are still sticking to everything, but added support for the existing ecosystem. Yes they are adding this to combat the network effect that node has, but it doesn't really go against anything. You simply prefix npm in front of npm imports. Now you could use a package.json file if you already have one, but you don't have to.

I have, but you glossed over my point.

What's wrong with a compatibility layer with npm if it's implemented properly?

His views on package.json and implementing a compatibility layer to help others transition from node are not mutually exclusive.

The support for node is pretty simple. Using NPM packages is straight forward. Reading a package.json file and using those mappings isn't complex either. Deno does not use node_modules in any of those instances...

I mean... not really?

The goals of Deno and Node are different, the architecture is different.

Adding a compatibility layer helps Deno grow while maintaining its original goals.

I doubt this adds much complexity if done properly...

So if a family provided eggs & sperm and had a surrogate to give birth on their behalf, then later gave the child up for adoption, how would you identify everyone?

Also, I'd assume the child would later look for those people with their genetic material, their biological parents, those who provided the sperm & eggs. Not the birth parent, who birthed them. There's much less of a connection there as it's the person who simply carried them for a money transaction and is not part of the child genetically.

So if a family provided eggs & sperm and had a surrogate to give birth on their behalf, then later gave the child up for adoption, how would you identify everyone?

Also, I'd assume the child would later look for those people with their genetic material, their biological parents, those who provided the sperm & eggs. Not the birth parent, who birthed them. There's much less of a connection there as it's the person who simply carried them for a money transaction and is not part of the child genetically.

Thinking about it more wouldn't biological more relate to those who are linked biologically (the egg & sperm).

The birth parents would be the mother who actually gave birth (and if existing, the spouse who is in the relationship with the birth mother).

This is would be much more prevalent of a distinction due to surrogacy.

> Reading the article it might have a new meaning which potentially refers to the parent who actually performs the birth? I still don’t think I’d consider that woke but I’ve never heard it in that context and would find it a confusing term since I’m used to the other definition.

I see, another user commented about it possibly including "surrogacy", so that may be the explanation there.

Biological would more refer to those who provided the sperm & eggs, birth would refer to those who actually did the... birthing. The birth father would be the one in the relationship with the birth mother?

Interesting. From your perspective, what's the % of how often you have heard "biological" vs "birth" parents and has the rate changed any?

I'm curious as to why the change of what I've heard (biological parents) and in the recent year (birth parents).

I replied to your other comment, but you could clarify here, when did it come to popular usage, when was it "invented", and when did you here about it?

Because I first heard it used about a year ago.

As another user pointed out, why does the definition you posted qualify it with:

"who has been adopted"

> It's not a new term

I see, it's somewhat new to me, when did the term come to popular usage? When was it "invented"?

Actually at closer look would you say that the definition is wrong?

Or is it being used wrong?

Biological parents already described that.

@procinct posted a definition that disagrees with you.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/birth%20parent

This seems to be a problem with these new "woke" words or however you'd like to describe them.

They seem unnatural and sudden which is why everyone is confused.

Do you have the same judgement you invented or would you like to mind read other's opinions and generalize groups of people some more?

How I took that is you just don't want to commit to your own statements, so you speak through these "others"...

And backend isn't just web. I was using a catch-all to call out how, misinformed, ignorant, and offensive your statement was.

Or you don't understand the needs or the technology because of your stubbornness and ignorance.

That's why I look down upon engineers with your mindset. I won't generalize all backend engineers as you did to frontend though.

I've met many who get it but of course prefer the peacefulness of controlling the execution environment and the limited state of a server.

Btw imo backend is boring because the reasons above, frontend has a lot more going on. As a full stack engineer I'd say frontend is much much harder, and that's why you have all the tech trying to make it easier to scale and maintain. That's not to say backend doesn't have it's own difficulties. It all depends what you are making too. A website is easy, a complex app is much more difficult.

Honestly, being able to build a company that creates livelihoods while simultaneously teaching people foreign languages goes against many of the historical and modern definitions of "late stage capitalism".

But I assume you're just using the super modern catch-all fad term of late stage capitalism that means nothing.

Also, from TFA: "Duolingo Max is available to everyone"

Government agencies and many companies only seem to be accessible via Twitter.

It's also the place to find, listen, and reply to public figures.

To sum it up, it's the main place to "broadcast" your message to the world.

It'll never match the muscle memory. Practicing welding isn't that expensive either...

After the safety courses you're never in the classroom. You should always be behind the stick with an instructor.

It really only takes a summer in the barn to learn how to weld.

Just put in 100 hours or so and you're good. 10000 and you're a pro, just like any trade, including programming.

The referrer header is for site to site, not directly from browser.

The browser injecting a referrer header seems less transparent than it being in the link, no?