alharith

In addition, lasers scan extremely well in low light conditions due to the intense light a laser outputs which illuminates the barcode so the sensor can read it, even in the dark.

Just imagining the frustration of trying to perfectly angle your camera to scan a can of beans in your dark cupboard makes me want to toss my phone against a wall.

This is not an apt counter analogy for many reasons, and actually can be made to argue against the point you are trying to make. I'll give a few examples here:

- In a computer science education, you do indeed still use a computer.

- There are still proprietary techniques, substrates, solutions and materials that industry chemists use that you almost certainly don't have access to in your standard university classroom. These would be akin to the variety of frameworks, tools, and libraries that exist in the programming world, many of which are open and documented, many of which are proprietary and closed sourced. Hopefully, however, your university education has taught you how to learn to learn in order to use these things.

- Chemistry is not about test tubes and beakers. That's just what it looks like today. Likewise Programming by typing characters on a screen is just what it looks like today. To introduce another analogy, just like Geometry is no longer about rulers and measuring pyramids, Computer Science is about how to formalize knowledge and it just happens to look like semicolons, braces, and 0's and 1's today.

> It's a failure of the education system. They want to teach the academic side but ignore the skill side.

Common misconception, but no this is not a failure of the academic side. This is exactly what universities are for. The thinking always was that if you teach the fundamentals, then the practical applications are a foregone conclusion. Someone who is well versed in advanced theories of computer science and electrical engineering: boolean logic, circuits, abstract computation machines and models of computing, data structures, algorithms, language design should be able to pick up whatever FooBar FOTM programming language or paradigm or framework that comes out.

If you think that the situation today is difficult with all the languages and frameworks we have just know that it was almost the exact same back then as well, except you didn't have the internet, chat rooms, and robust documentation and Q/A sites to help you answer your questions. Imagine the, excuse my frank language here, whining that would be happening right now on this forum and many others if you were just slapped with an IBM manual and told to bootstrap things yourself. I could only imagine!

Trade schools are suppose to be the institutions that teach you practical skills "to get a job". Universities are for expanding your mind and learning. I don't know why we mixed the two and then act surprised when a multi-century institution fails at modern workforce demands.

To anyone reading this: Do NOT go to a University to get a job. If your goal is just to get a job in this field, you can do that in far easier and cheaper ways (start reading some programming docs and get busy building things). You go to a university to learn. The getting a job part is a natural consequence of the learning you have done and are now are able to do.

Not a medical scientist at all, but I would assume any virus that is primarily respiratory to affect your lung function. I would bet the influenza does similar things. I don't know many people that return to their prior physiological strength after a bout with a serious virus.

This would be the reasonable title. However, in the current zeitgeist everything needs to be framed as some sort of injustice.

Great, so we are living longer, less full lives. Yes every time this point is brought up, medical technology is always pointed to as the big "gotcha!." Let's concede that medical technology indeed has done us all a great service, and set that aside. Now what? Social media has made keeping in contact easier? That's all you got? Really?

> People who pine for the past are ignoring the facts in their face. Life has never been better.

For the very temporary moment. There's many hypothesizing that our mostly sterile lives we've lived in the past 50 years was not a good idea, that your immune system needs practice, and that when the next superbug comes along, not only will we not be able to handle it, we won't have effective antibiotics to combat them, but I digress.

No, not we. Only sick people that need help think like this.

The fallacy I can't help but point out here is that thinking because of our science we are better off and have somehow been "enlightened" when all evidence points to the contrary, at least not to the things that truly matter: the human condition, life, love, family, relationships: can't say our science and techology has made these things better on a whole, but at least we can binge watch Netflix and play Minecraft together I guess.

Sure, we can crunch numbers and test hypotheses faster, but they were doing that with far more primitive instruments, in most cases even without writing and simply using their minds, for centuries well before the so called Enlightenment period. It seems the more "enlightened" we become the worse off the condition of the human soul becomes, and the more we favor vices and all the things our fathers and mothers tried to warn us against for centuries. Our Science, which in of itself has become a religion, in my view has lead us all to cultures of indulgence, where utilitarianism is the only value to be regarded. I wish you could say at least we aren't slaughtering ourselves anymore in the name of Religion, but sure enough, human slaughtering has increased by entire factors these past two centuries, than the previous 100 combined, "Enlightenment" or not.

The notion of man gaining reason and "growing out of" religion during this period is in of itself such a hilariously cliche, Western-centric viewpoint of history but this is another issue of itself.

Can you not insure yourself, or insure yourself against someone else?

The same reason your desktop based email client probably depends on it. It’s 2020 and developers are starting to make use of all the modern browser features. It’s time to stop thinking like the browser is some fickle thing that needs to be caressed and treat it like a sandboxed OS environment for delivering apps and content.

Caused 670,000 to uphold the law and prevent us from inching that much closer to anarchy. That's the invisible benefit to most. Soon as criminals can figure out the law enforcement's cost-benefit ratio, they will start exploiting it, and there's too many examples of this to count.

Can I combine this with the seed money I have been sowing?

Following up on this, it seems like they did quite well.

If we as a species make it that far, parts of your genetic material will have survived, somewhere.

Do you have a source for that? I am aware, according to the Brookings Institute, and world renowned economist Professor Raj Chetty, that it has been relatively flat for decades. Your parents wealth, and where you are born are the two biggest factors for economic mobility. Always has been, most likely always will be, so this isn't necessarily news or novel. So again, not sure divisive rhetoric and entrenching a feeling of class warfare is going to help anything. California, for example, where most people on this site are located and where a large majority of US-based socialism supporters are located, has some of the best mobility in the country. In fact, the single best thing you can do for your economic mobility is to simply move to a higher mobility area (surprise surprise).

http://www.equality-of-opportunity.org/assets/documents/mobi... http://www.equality-of-opportunity.org/assets/documents/move...

This “berniespeak” needs to go away. It’s divisive and further entrenched people into polarization. There have been plenty of people from the “bottom 90%” that entered a new income bracket thanks to technology. Let’s celebrate it instead of generalizing it to conform to a politicians ideological battle against the “wealthy”

Debating whether certain domains are more difficult/painful in Go than other languages is valid. Saying they are impossible is extreme.

> in which everyone has the means to have a comfortable life,

Why do you think everyone should have the means to have a "comfortable" life? Perhaps you mean means to meet necessities? If not, what does "comfortable" mean to you? Additionally, why do you think that the means are not there today?

> which makes a lot of problems impossible to model accurately

Impossible?

> (instead, you have to fall back to reflection, which is extremely unsafe, and the API is very error-prone),

Extremely unsafe?

> when you make something simple, you move complexity elsewhere.

Does it? Or did you, in reality, not really make it simpler?

> Go says “don't worry about encodings! things are probably utf-8”

Does it? https://blog.golang.org/strings

It just sounds like the author is very frustrated at some seemingly minor inconsistencies (from their perspective), and the extreme language used for things that are not that extreme are evidence in my opinion. Blogging can be a good exercise to shed some frustration, I definitely understand that aspect. Not sure this needs to be shared as a good example of anything or taken in any light, other than "someone is venting."

Yeah, pfft, Java EE has had this since the early 2000s too. What's old is new again, amirite??

Common fallacy. Historically there has been a system of morals that has governed capitalism. Capitalism is about making a profit but also increasing the general welfare. The true capitalist dream is to make tons of money and bring forth great societal good. It's only now where the US has becoming increasingly amoral that we see the "late stage" capitalism we see today.

> I feel like we need some form of regulation to limit how marketplaces like Etsy can dictate how their sellers conduct business.

I halfway agree, and halfway feel the opposite: We need to restore teeth to our existing regulatory bodies, and we need more competition. We need to reduce barriers to entry, and stop the anti-competitive behavior behemoths like Amazon have been exerting for years now.

> The problem with this IMO is that some enterprising person will just use regular tailwind (or another utility-css framework like tachyons) and re-implement all of these components and give it out for free, circumventing the license and killing the value of this.

No because I believe that for every enterprising person wanting to circumvent paying for software, there are that many people who want to support the entrepreneurial spirit Adam and company show, and pay for good work. That's what capitalism is suppose to be about at least, anyways.

Wow. First time reading this as well, and there is such wisdom in it.

It is doubly apt considering what is going on in the political realm currently as well. Not a lot of understanding or willingness to fix things within the constraints of a system, just promises to tear it all down and replace it with utopian versions.

Credit Karma recently opened a decent sized office in my city and is continuing to expand. There are still 26+ engineering roles posted. I visit the office frequently and know a lot of the director levels and up working there. They aren't going anywhere or stopping anything they are doing.

In one of the issues, you can get a sense of the motivation behind the project:

> Fiber started as a personal project to be able to rewrite all my node apps into Go. I tried to stick to the same workflow as Express by using interfaces, this is indeed not the Go standard.

But yeah, unless you want to do the same, I agree this project can definitely do more harm than good to new Gophers. It's awesome to do it as a personal experimentation and see if it can be done, but it's another thing to attempt to sell it to others as a good idea.

If you need a regex that complicated it’s probably better to be written as a parser. Not only will it be way more performant, it will be much more maintainable.

I see that now, yes I do. I think maybe the headings and subheadings are also throwing me off as well. I wasn't sure if I was reading one of those types of blogs that have a continuous feed of articles on one page.

I am confused by this article. It went an entirely different direction based on the question proposed. It was all entertaining, nonetheless, but besides some passing comments to Reason’s documentation being better, the question does not seem to be explored much by this article. It’s a good article and should be renamed to maybe “Getting started with OCaml and OpenGL”

Thanks for the reply, apologies for the incorrect assumption, but it's the internet.