Not to be dismissive of your idea, but isn't this decade(s) old? QT Creator, Dreamweaver, Wordpress, etc... All are in some form a "drag-n-drop code gen" tool. Could you elaborate on your point and how it differs from the existing codeless tools?
118 karma · joined October 14, 2016
So, for example, according to the 2010 US Census, Black or African Americans constitute 12.6% of the population. However, according to [1], they constitute only ~5% of the CS degrees awarded. Therefore the score for CS and Black or African Americans is |12.6 - 5|/12.6 = ~60% underrepresentation.
I would be careful, since you quite quickly shot towards being bias, by disregarding any merit to the side that you very obviously disagree with. Just like how you said they deride, you just did exactly the same. How is the problem of devisiveness and the environment going to be solved like that?
Progress never comes from deriding IMHO.
It's a trend that is in my honest opinion one of the more increasingly troublesome and negative aspects of modern human civilisation. Xaas has a nasty side-effect of concentrating wealth and power to fewer and fewer individuals, it creates a much deeper power structure, since one finances another who finances another who...and so on, and the more you financialise the more you can financialise - an unstable equilibrium, or "positive feedback loop". With classical unfinancialised markets, it is a more Slack(the app)-like flat structure, where products are exchanged and ownership is transfered. Everyone becomes an owner. Power, wealth, and resources diffuse similar to that of the heat equation.
We can see this nasty effect in the housing markets, for example. The current situation where the law and society in general allows a growing number of ownership-hoarders who buy up many houses in an area and lets them out to their fellow underlings is a rather dangerous and volatile setup, and historically does not end well for anyone, but especially those up top.
Rather shoddy journalism. It's been especially bad on HN recently...
Tell that to the Egyptians, Romans, Easter-Islanders (debated now, actually), and the countless other human civilisations who didn't really appreciate their impending demise before it was too late. Hell, the Romans hired essentially barbarians (so mercenaries, basically) to defend the northern territories against...you guessed it, barbarians.
Just because the bulk of the harmful effects that humans contribute to begin at 50+ years, conveniently after humans have to live through it. Humans still create children to suffer through the hell they created though, how peculiar.
Also, I find "War on poverty" hilarious. Like a country saying it's "making crime illegal".
However, I will say this. If anyone has ever been in a large storm, or a drought, you'll be shockingly aware at how quickly a small announcement about "sold-out water" or "store stock issues" turns into absolute, utter, pure, _pandemonium_. Once _that_ happens often enough, I think people will begin to admit that we lost _something_, for sure.
To answer your question though, it's generally believed that it will be a gradually-growing sense of despair and dread, and a growing struggle. Migration into the northern hemisphere as it slowly becomes the last livable place on Earth. Ever played musical chairs in the later stages of the game? Yeah.
Honestly, it's remarkably similar to the mechanics behind the French Revolution, but instead of just rich vs poor, it's some kind of crazy triadic chaos-war between rich, poor, and nature, all made more ironic that nukes have a triadic motif.
It's not just the US. The entire west is afraid of China. In around the Reagan years, the US - along with almost the entire west - offshored their manufacturing to China et al. Of course, now it's been about 40 years since and almost all of large scale manufacturing has moved to china (i.e. steel).
In the end the west wanted cheap imports, and they got it. But IMHO we are beginning to wake up to the fact that nothing is for free (as always), and what the west gained from having a virtually 1-billion-strong externalised pseudo-slavary labour force, they will pay in their own demise as an entire western generation grows up unable to build anything, begging to be economically annhiliated. The west made china a god and asked for bountiful reward - who wants to bet they will give it to the west forever?
This all is reminding me of another saying, a spartan one. A Spartan woman was asked why they do not submit to their men, and she replied with "strong men are not born from weak women".
If anyone is liking these forms of phrases (short, insightful), there is a word just for it: Laconic [1].
Part of me thinks that the easy way now where we can do IRS forms (and everything) online and to our door of our houses, will make us weak.
There is some old Roman bit about easy/good/soft times breeding weak men who bring tough times, but I think i'm going on a tangent from the disappearance of paper IRS forms at local libraries...
Apologies for my French. It's just that HN is a lot smarter than this...
For those unaware, an empty house can go untouched for decades in NYC, but once it develops a broken window, it is ransacked and squatted within hours. Small failures invite large failures.
"Javascript bloat isn't too bad, just another 10KB" turns into (VERY quickly) slow + terrible code that is trash. Small amounts of apathy about code invites other developers to sink to lower (more sh*tty) standards until there is nothing good left.
I'm not saying we should all code in assembly and c and make sure our arrays are memory aligned and pointers efficiently used, etc. etc., but we should also not just stop caring about code quality for "productivity" sake.
Take a look at GPU company stock prices over the past 2-3 years for me will ye' ;)
EDIT: I understand your comment now, yes it is. How this startup got funded I have no idea, it's a decade-old SEO "sh*tlording" technique :/
No but this is such a pattern in human history. Don't fight war, sell the weapons. Don't mine bitcoin, sell the cards. Don't start a startup, start a meta-startup (startup about startups). Easy $$$! Basically be the parasitic side-liner supplying to the often-fruitless follies of mankind.
[1] https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=s...
Many people seem to often not notice how never before in human history has centralised communication existed, and it was never foreseen that a few "private" companies would control almost all of it.
It's why I always think of it as rather rediculous when people refer to the U.S. constitution and other literature and preach "but X says that only a government is controlled and private-company-hosted speech is defenseless!", and not realise that Facebook et al, if anything, _is_ a "government" to a 17th Century human (especially to those who drafted the Constitution).
If power is a measureable "quantity", then I'de say that FB alone has more of it than what 17th, 18th, and 19th Century Governments had. The laws are very outdated I think.
Essentially, string theory was inspired by Fynmann diagrams, via considering the 1-D particle "world-lines" in those diagrams as 2-D "areas".
The rest of the _very_ complex theory comes logically after. A lot of physicists point towards the "natural" nature of string theory as a favourable aspect of it, in stark contrast to QM which has _always_ been unnatural. The statistical nature of QM - "probabilities and uncertainties", has a "hidden-variable/phenomenon" about it, very much like how the random motion of a particle on the surface of water was seen (by Einstein no less) to actually be brownian motion - in this case water particles hitting the surface particle. QM often screams "I don't know but maybe X is Y and Y is Z with Q% chance", meanwhile string theory says "what if X is Y, and therefore A, B, C, D, ...", which is how classical physics and GR (Einstein) was done. The latter way is seen as a much "stronger" and "insightful" way of physics, and string theory walks more towards that nice line than QM ever did.
As a physicist myself, QM has always stank. Everybody knows it. It "works" like HTML/CSS/JS "works". I've always thought that QM has an identity crisis. It tries to stretch itself in two very distinct directions, towards "Quantum Physics" (randomness, uncertainty, strange things like entanglement), and yet relies on vague classical things like "mass". With the Higgs Boson, it relies less on classical things and _indeed_ the Higgs Boson was very sought after (hence the huge celebration for it's discovery) because it pulled QM away from classical physics. But still, QM has a few "smelly" parts. When you see that Schrodinger equation and see that mass variable, doesn't that make you...uncomfortable? Kind of like downloading a "login-form" javascript UI library and using it, and having no idea what it's about or what's going on or how it works.