Sawamara

The myth of top talent is overrated, especially in managerial positions for companies where the workers have more say in decisions.

I feel that pain, yeah. On the other hand, at least the error messages are often helpful with Webpack.

"Productivity is up and wages might stagnate - but here's why its actually a good thing"

They do reveal a pattern that is equivalent to ignoring the canaries in a coalmine. The Amazon's fires are crucial this year not because there was not burning previously, but because once the ecosystems collapse, there is no regaining the rainforest. And of course it will happen, anyone who thinks otherwise is either ignorant, stupid, or plainly paid to ignore it. Wind? There is a difference between it being not good enough to be a primary source vs "providing zero energy", and the list goes on.

The hunting of endangered species is a gross practice that is a natural extension of the colonialist history of the West. When rich whites go to shoot animals who are not capable of defending themselves, no one should kid itself that yeah, there are alternatives to that horrid practice - and meanwhile, illegal hunting continues to eat up entire species, so the whole talk about hunting conserving the population is simply not true when taken in its actual context.

And we completely ignored the times when the ruling class goes to countries, shoots animals unlawfully, and gets away with it. Examples:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/11/donald-trump... https://dailynewshungary.com/deputy-pm-semjens-swedish-hunt-...

And we could continue with more historic examples, like this piece of art right here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smithsonian%E2%80%93Roosevelt_...

Makes my skin crawl.

Just one click to the author's name reveals these titles:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/author/matt-ridley/

>The most dangerous thing about the Amazon fires is the apocalyptic rhetoric

>Ignore the global warming hysteria: hurricanes are not getting worse

>The eradication of South Georgia’s rats proves we can do anything

>Wind turbines are neither clean nor green and they provide zero global energy

>The world is getting greener. Why does no one want to know?

And my personal favorite:

>How hunting and shooting help wildlife – and not just in Africa

Bloody brilliant, let me tell you.

Help us out, champ.

As someone have pointed out in the thread itself: this is not in any way React's fault. If you want, you can add (p)react for a few kb to your page, serve a max 20-25k js code with it and still do not match the served image's size.

However, when websites decide to instead track the everliving hell out of their users, this is what happens. Absolutely pathetic. Another similar experience I have with mobile sites is Reddit, its intentionally throttling the site and tries to turn you towards their app.

Thank you for posting articles like these. I feel a bit relieved seeing how its not demigods with decades of in-domain experience who create sometimes huge, monumental modules or building blocks of whole languages, but instead: actual human beings who might have been short on options, time or bought into some technical debt in the process of creating something useful.

But this is exactly the point of studies like this. They are written in a way that allows misinterpretation, and then the media can pick it up and run with it (like they did with this one).

There is a large body of writing about P-hacking, bias in studies, this is just one more in that long, long list.

It is not. Please read the summary of the study,and tell me that that the conclusions drawn there are reasonable.

A coworker linked the original study to me, and was quite glib about how this new study is quite reliable and so on. I checked it out, immediately got suspicious by the article (that was even more nonsensical, since it was not written by a scientist), then went into the study's summary instead, which was already way more nuanced .

What mostly stood out to me: the study did not even try to discredit the hard and overwhelming evidence that consuming red meat regularly does give you a single-digit percent incrase of various types of cancers. They then proceeded to give a summary that says that there is no point in worrying over such small percentage likelihood increases, basically (I am obviously paraphrasing here, so)

After that, we concluded with the coworker that yeah, this was not a holy grail counter to "mainstream science", just one slightly fishy one.

But this does not diminish my trust in the scientific method. This just adds one more example to the book 'why you should always try to at least verify/clarify claims before blindly believing them'.

Here is the thing though (8+ year vegetarian here, with vegan periods): we have been grown up eating shit like that. Eating sausages, salami, all that jazz.

There is nothing wrong with going back to the spices and texture of that. A certified bio soy sausage gives me everything that I want to get that is familiar and similar to me eating hot-dogs in my childhood - and without any ethical concerns. So please, do understand that not everyone wants to replicate food, but rather just want something with a shape of familiarity to insert into their everyday staples.

It is rather interesting to me to see that V8 has been packing so many micro-optimizations and special techniques over the years that now it has become actually feasible to just start cutting back on the optimizations to have performance gains.

What all this enables is, beside having more sensible defaults, is the ability for developers who use V8 with Electron or NW.js to tweak the default behavior of the engine, catering to their application's needs. That is always good.

Biodegradability means nothing in the context of plastic that ends up in rivers, seas and oceans. Nothing. That is not a solution.

We need waste control, enforced harsh laws on producers (industries and tourists and waste manager companies), and we needed it a decade ago.

This is what happens when capitalism relies on an externality and that externality is fed up with its bullcrap.

Exactly. Its very hard to claim that one is just putting stuff out on "the marketplace of ideas", when in reality, losing ground to an ideology that places people who have non-majority skin color, sexuality or religious views (or lack thereof) below the majority is simply dangerous to any minority, and should not be allowed to fester. This is not just about ideas, its about refusing others the full rights of personhood. And that should not stand in any ethical society.

Exactly. It is only when upfront sale gets combined with season passes AND microtransactions AND lootbox-systems is when criticism gets to arise. Rightfully.

If you are honest in your approach to selling games, you will not get overwhelming criticism about ANY of the above game modes.

Full-priced games have tens of millions of sales regularly. Games that do not hide content behind paywalls can sell cosmetic microtransactions all day long (see: League of Legends or Path of Exile).

Its transparent "money grab for the sake of money grabbing" that gets the rightful criticism. Besides, I have literally never seen any complex indie game being attacked for releasing in the 9.99$-19.99$ space. Never.

There is a heck of a difference between "eh, it only costs $5-$10" and between "the survival of my project relies on the site/service being under my control. If it was the latter, you go in having a plan B and a contingency Plan c.

GCP, AWS, DO, Azure... they all bank on that sweet combination of huge clients and clients who do not really need them but due to opportunity costs, cant be bothered to find viable, self-reliant alternatives.

You keep moving the goalpost. Lets just assume we are on a caloric budget and we deal with fat being fat, so we can, like good third graders in math, just count the calories.

No more wiggling around with "too many calories" and "you need to burn calories to transform them to carbs" and then "oh, but it also sticks to your abdomen". Pick one. Stick to that one, and argue with that.

Also, yeah, since, for example, coffee is the highest source of antioxidants in the western diet for many people, I am willing to make a bet that sunflower oil will going to be their highest source of E-vitamin (300% of your required daily amount per 100ml). Olive oil will be the highest source of Vitamin K and both Vitamin E for people who do not GORGE on greens.

In the US, the olive oil wont be the highest source for Vitamin E only because peanuts are more abundant in them.

You are bullshitting against fats and vegetables, for what reason I do not know.

But nuts and seeds are NOT "almost 100%" percent fat. They range from fat contents of 30g to upwards 70-75g per 100g (walnuts, for example, are on a higher end of this, so are hazelnuts. Almonds, pistachio are the middle ground, while peanuts - technically legume, I know -are on the lower side.

The rest? 8-10 percent carbs, 10g+ fiber (some contain less, some much more), and anything between 10 to 30% protein (highest ones, again are almonds and peanuts, and sesame seeds).

This is very easy to verify, you just need to do a quick googling. I do not know why anyone would clame this. Some of your other claims are going to be harder to look up, so I would like some citations, like the ones with olive oils STICKING TO YOUR ABDOMEN :P

Your body needs fat. Also, olive oil contains plenty of antioxidants, and Vitamin K and E - so the claim that it is just empty calories is pointless.

Also, just a thought game for you: if I were to claim that your carbs are just empty calories, and my fat covers those calories too, what would your response be? Because the body can create carbs from fat and fat from carbs, so that point is kinda moot. Just pointing out the calorie content of an oil is not a negative against it. An average man need ~2000 kcal daily, and an average women needs ~1500. Just by carbs and proteins alone, that would mean 400g+ of that intake. Why?

You should not buy this, olive oils are one of the healthiest sources of fat on this earth. Plenty of studies confirm it.

He has several a-prioris built into his argument, the most important hidden one is: - Meat is inherently superior because we keep eating it (nevermind that we keep eating lentils and peas just fine for thousands of years) - That your gut somehow cannot be introduced new things to it because the science is not clear on the long-term effects (regardless of how clear science are on the long term effects of processed red meat) - Also, naturalistic fallacy, like hamburgers were natural entities that grow in gardens, and you just pluck them from the trees, and its oh-so-natural

+1: If he is so worried about canola oil, just check what quality of oil burger king is using for frying his meat.

"Vegetable oils are terrible for you?"

At that point, I knew something was up. He is one of those who consider soy harmful to you. Sheer insanity.

Also, he is making an argument on a false pretense: that eating processed meat is somehow okay because its already introduced to our diet. Guess what: it is not good for people. This is a product that is designed to be an alternative to that, not to home-cooked healthy italian meatless alternatives.

No I do not. You will have to work very hard to back up the claim that modern DOM operations are not costly. Plenty of lookups can cause repaint or reflow.

Scenario A: (Vdom-like approach) - Render x with dimensions x,y,z,w. - Store the reference to the created DOM elements. - Store dimensions it was created with

If you do not go towards this way, and actually query DOM-land to get the dimensions you need to check against, you will run into issues. By storing your state alongside the endpoint, you will only have to diff against the stored state and props, not the endpoints themselves.

That COMPLETELY bypasses DOM access, and only updates the changed elements.

Show me how bypassing this and just using dom alone is superior. Or how adding layers of layers of js-land checks is not approaching the solution that vdom and differs already arrived at.

Tell that to Guild Wars 2. (https://mithril.js.org/framework-comparison.html)

But putting even those games aside which use webview for UI, there are still video games made inside the browser, and for those, having sub-1ms rerender times with React is perfectly reasonable. We could get into immediate mode vs retained mode debates right about here, but that is a slightly different topic :D

Ew, not really. Even the getters can be performance-heavy in DOM-land. If you store your data in JS-land, and only diff against that, you never need to touch the dom for anything, except the endpoint insertions. At worst, it is matched evenly by any sort of custom vanillaJS+Dom manipulation tool (which needs to be perfectly well written, and hand-crafted to match what you are currently working on). At best, its several orders of magnitudes faster compared to a badly written DOM-manipulation-heavy code.

I was running some quite complex UI systems in several of my projects with vanillaJS, cached DOM elements, all that jazz. Nothing like VDOM. Then eventually, it started to finally bog me down. Like rendering an inventory in an RPG system where you can buy stuff from the vendors: I started to get dissatisfied with change operations that lasted upwards to 2-3ms in a bad day. Then I started caching even more DOM elements, and started to build local data structures to see which was rendered last,and to what, to avoid rerendering everything, and to optimize to the change-based render only.

A few weeks of this, and it dawned on me that had I needed to generalize my solution, I would have arrived at the exacty same model that hyperscript does for its diffing, and something similar to whats underneath React's diffing method (or Preact since I prefer that, but they share the API).

So yeah, virtual dom is just a more clever and straightforward way to map your state to the dom, identifyng exactly where the changes happened, and only updating those nodes, instead of doing any queries towards the dom api (costly, can cause rerender,like when checking for bounding boxes, etc).

It IS more useful because you no longer need to maintain a hyper-specific update function per project and manuallí created/maintained differs.

You seriously should just start the discussion by actually checking out how garbage collection actually works instead of touting random garbage about how it is just a predictions game.

Garbage collection has multiple variations, multiple optimizations, multiple tradeoffs. Different variations are powering the most popular and the most used languages all around the world (see also: C#, Javascript, Java).

To think that that is just "research thrown at a bad problem" is sheer insanity.

I propose we split this discussion up, because dealing with leaks is a completely different problem than dealing with garbage collection. You can have memory leaks in manually managed languages too, it has nothing to do with GC. But lets not throw the whole field out just because you do not want to deal with automatic memory management tradeoffs.

That is frustrating, I concede on that point. (If there is one thing that is bad about the JS ecosystem, its the brittleness and complexities of setting up build tools. If you get together one that suits your need, you do not look at it again unless an update breaks it. Then the process of looking it up how exactly it works comes again, and this repeats yearly :P)