d35007

That’s interesting! Can you say a little more? I find jq’s syntax and semantics to be simple and intuitive. It’s mostly dots, pipes, and brackets. It’s a lot like writing shell pipelines imo. And I tend to use it in the same way. Lots of one-time use invocations, so I spend more time writing jq filters than I spend reading them.

I suspect my use cases are less complex than yours. Or maybe jq just fits the way I think for some reason.

I dream of a world in which all CLI tools produce and consume JSON and we use jq to glue them together. Sounds like that would be a nightmare for you.

> Good. Baseball isn't a serious spectator sport. It's only interesting to statisticians

What makes a spectator sport "serious"?

The average MLB game had almost 30,000 spectators in the 2024 season[1]. That's a lot of statisticians.

[1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/maurybrown/2024/10/01/mlb-atten...

This is a pretty weak argument. Blaming the two-party system might feel good, but I don't think it gives us a better understanding of what happened in this election. People voted for the guy at the top of the ticket, and he was pretty clear about wanting to get rid of some federal agencies. I think we have to conclude that people were receptive to his message.

My hot take is that the two-party system isn't anywhere near as bad as people think it is. In countries with multi-party systems, parties often have to form coalitions in order to govern. In countries with two-party systems, parties have to do most of that coalition forming before the election. That's why we see far-left and center-left politicians in the Democratic party instead of having viable left wing parties.

One way or another, we get a coalition government. Is it better for those coalitions to be formed before the election or after? If it happens before the election, the electorate can see the results in time to change their decision. If it happens after the election, the fringe parties' arguments probably get discussed more, but there's no guarantee those parties will be part of the governing coalition.

> You are editing text. If you rely on a paid product to do so then prepare to be a laughingstock when the license changes in a way you disagree with.

You are caring too much about what other people think. If someone laughs at me because of a tool I use, they're the tool

I pay for a JetBrains subscription. They're worth the money, imo. I've paid for Panic software in the past and did not regret it. I'm still pretty happy with my mix of Sublime Text 3, vim, and JetBrains, but if I get bored one day, I might check out Nova

A preference is just a bias with a more positive connotation.

The author acknowledges their bias in the title.

The article's title is "Why I Prefer Exceptions to Error Values". It literally tells you that it's biased.

None. Did I imply that it’s something else?

What is it about?

> There are 2 parts to this argument, first being people are justifying their iPhone ownership,(and cult membership) with "Apple should do exactly what they are doing" because I like what I get, and I don't want the other folks in my cult ;).

It sounds like you’re assuming that people are in a “cult” because they don’t share some of your opinions. I’m sure that’s not what you’re doing, because you are a rational person engaging in a rational discussion. Can you help me understand what you really meant?

> Then the argument becomes why are people who are reading HN and, presumably, calling themselves hackers so interested in keeping status quo and letting Apple control everything?

Because they like Apple devices. Next question.

> I think we go back to argument 1 and excluding others, green bubbles and such making a subset "better" than others. Elitist as F and some folks, like myself cannot stand for this and take time to explain the failure to others.

It sounds like you’re upset because some people who buy Apple devices make jokes about “green bubbles” and “blue bubbles”. I’m sorry that happened to you. Nobody likes getting their feelings hurt.

I’m generally opposed to snobbery, but I don’t think it’s illegal.

> Pretty simple really ;)

Cool winky face.

> The issue is that your choice is constrained by vertical integration.

No it’s not. It’s constrained by one’s preferences as a consumer. If I am concerned about vertical integration, I will not choose an Apple device. Personally, I am not concerned about vertical integration. It seems to make my devices work better.

> If you like Apple's hardware, or iOS, or iMessage, or any number of other thing, these are all tied together with Apple's app store when they should not be.

Why not? Because you say so? Or because it harms consumers? Can you describe how it harms consumers? Smartphones are cheap and plentiful. Cloud-based apps and services are too.

Yes, I might have to make some tough choices as a consumer. Maybe no company makes the perfect device for me. I might really like iMessage, but hate iPhone hardware. But there are lots of viable competitors to iMessage and plenty of viable mobile devices on which to run them. “I don’t get to use iMessage on my Pixel phone” is not evidence of harm.

> It's like encountering a retail monopoly in California and someone tells you that you're lucky because you can shop at another store and all you have to do is move to Florida, which also has a retail monopoly, but a different one.

No, it’s not. Switching mobile platforms is nothing like migrating 2000+ miles in terms of difficulty or expense. If you want to use a retail analogy, it’s like complaining that you can’t buy Kirkland-branded products at Wal-Mart.

If I buy an iPhone, I can legally sell it. Thats ownership.

Great news! I don’t see many people on HN getting mad when you point out that Apple isn’t the best for everyone. I’m not saying you made it up. Maybe I just don’t read enough comments.

I do see people saying they like how Apple devices work, and that they consciously choose Apple devices over devices from other manufacturers. Those are informed consumers making a choice you wouldn’t make. It’s not sad. Some people won’t agree with you in life. That’s normal.

Choice does exist in the market. There are far more than 2 manufacturers, and some of them focus on more HN-ish people who have more principles than I do.

I don’t really want the government to limit my smartphone choices in this way, but I also realize that Apple devices will continue to exist and will mostly work the way they do today, so it’s not that big a deal to me.

> That is not an acceptable way for a computer to work.

Luckily, you have a choice. Other companies make handheld computers that align better with your definition of ownership.

Occam's razor says you should not multiple entities beyond what is necessary.

Our scenario is this: There's a guy in a vehicle. He is holding a gun. He has a gunshot wound. He has been under a lot of stress.

Explanation 1: The guy shot himself. Number of entities (people) required: 1

Explanation 2: Someone else shot the guy and staged the scene to look like a suicide. Number of entities (people) required: 2

Occam's razor says suicide is the most likely explanation

Got it, thanks boss.

The article tries to explain why your answer doesn’t tell the whole story. Did you read it?

The kids hate Java, and that's ok. No sense arguing with them. I am happy a tool I use frequently is getting better. I am also happy there are other tools out there.

> Another reminder that acronyms are pretty terrible for communication. Every time I onboard with a new org there’s a whole new set of acronyms to learn that’s barely faster than typing out the unabbreviated version

My (cynical) take on the matter is that software engineers want to prove how smart they are to other software engineers, and they think using obscure jargon and abbreviations is a good way to do it.

Oregon voted to decriminalize hard drugs in the 2020 election, according to the article.

Here's an article that discusses accessibility features in VisionOS: https://www.macrumors.com/2023/06/07/apple-vision-pro-access.... It's a summary of a WWDC session that I haven't watched. One of the items in the article says

> Dwell Control will provide on-screen options for Tap, Scroll, Long Press, and Drag, allowing for users to interact with the interface without using their hands.

Does the article address any of your concerns?

> 1.America is always good. They never did anything bad. They saved the world and they're heroes.

What subs did you look at? My experience on Reddit is the exact opposite. There's even a subreddit where people whine about people whining about how awful America is: https://old.reddit.com/r/AmericaBad/

> 2. Apple is god.

What subs did you look at? Even /r/apple frequently hates Apple.

> 2. China and Russia are very bad.

I do see these sentiments a lot.

> American invasions were justified.

What subs did you look at? What invasions are we talking about?

> 3. Chinese,product, companies are all bad. All they do is copy the almighty American companies.

I see this one a lot. Especially on subreddits devoted to military hardware and any time someone mentions TikTok.

I think the truth is that people remember the things that evoke an emotional response. It sounds like you get upset when you hear people say bad things about China and when you hear people say good things about America. You forget, or just don't read, all of the comments that contradict those people.

Are cleanliness standards relevant in this context? As far as I can tell, the tardigrades — and everything else mentioned in the article — were put there on purpose.

What does it reveal?

I mean, there’s also no need to freak the fuck out over a minor issue in German text on a predominantly English page. Ok, so “Mondschein Sonata” isn’t exactly the same as “mondscheinsonate”, but it’s damn close and it gets the point across: Some works have different names in different languages.

Guess what happens when I search Apple Classical for “mondscheinsonate”. In fact, don’t guess. Try it.

Why do you think this would change their minds?

> a one-stop shop for content is a natural monopoly

We have YouTube, Twitch, Instagram, and TikTok. We have Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and Hacker News. We have Netflix, Disney+, Peacock, and AppleTV.

Which of those is the “natural monopoly” for content?

That Atlantic is part of the "main stream media".

How many are left? /s

> To tell mutable and immutable collections apart, you just need two separate interfaces, a feature available in Java for decades, and an approach widely and routinely used everywhere in the language.

Part of the problem might be that Java's existing interfaces for collections don't have that split. `List`, `Set`, and `Map` already declare mutators, and they're used pervasively.

On the other hand, the Java folks clearly recognize that mutability is the wrong default for modern programming languages, so why double down on the mistakes of the past? They might argue that it makes more sense to follow established patterns than it does to create new ones, because it creates less friction for Java developers.

All of those comments seem pretty reasonable to me. Does that make me a shill too?