Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | wiseowise's commentslogin

> It takes a good programmer to write it, and most good programmers avoid JavaScript, unless forced to use it for their day job.

Nonsense.


> But for a dev waiting 50ms or 20ms does not matter. At all.

It absolutely does:

https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2018-May/153296...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16978932.


To win benchmark games it does, in a world where people keep shipping Electron crap, not really.

People shaving off the last milliseconds or microseconds in their tooling aren't the same people shipping slow code to browsers. Say thanks to POs, PMs, stakeholders, etc.

Sometimes they are the same person.

It just take someone to have poor empathy towards your users to ship slow software that you don't use.


I've never met a single person obsessed with performance who goes half the way. You either have a performance junkie or a slob who will be fine with 20 minutes compile times.

I have. They cared a lot about performance for them because they hated waiting, but gave literally no shit about anyone else.

So uv for JavaScript? Nice.

No, that would probably be pnpm, even thought it's not nearly as fast because it's written in JS.

I thought it's mainly written in Rust https://github.com/oxc-project/oxc . Which oxc project is written in JS ?

They are talking about pnpm (which they said would be the uv equivalent for node, though I disagree given that what pnpm brings on top of npm is way less than the difference between uv and the status quo in Python).

So you think trudging through life with kids is somehow more virtuous than trying to enjoy limited time you have?

This is not an honest question

yes obv

> No value judgment, but it's interesting. I haven't had kids (yet?), and I feel the internet (and the career that revolves around it) is the biggest reason why.

How exactly the internet and the career prevented you from having kids? Have you discussed this with your partner?


It’s a new trend to shoehorn any random shit into this comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224.

> Yeah I can make a dropbox clone in a one-liner bash command too

Jesus, is this the only argument you people have now? Some decade old comment of a non-business guy?

Parent is right, loops removes precisely what makes TikTok addicting. It’s like removing heroin high for addicts – what’s the point of the injection, then?


> People enjoy short form video, people should be able to enjoy things they like with dignity, which is in extremely short supply on algorithm and advert driven social media.

People “enjoy” heroin, crack cocaine, fentanyl too, should they “enjoy” them with dignity too?


Yes, of course. That’s what Portugal’s drug policy did. By allowing a path for doing hard drugs safely and with dignity, you also allow a path for conversation, getting help, and leaving them behind.

So the argument here is like a harm reduction argument, as in the decriminalization/legalization of hard drugs?

That seems a little uncharitable, though it does get me wondering... Imagine if benevolent hackers took over The Algorithm. What might they achieve?

They could promote high quality educational content, as is done in certain other nations.

They could utilize the companies' infinite knowledge of Skinner box mechanics to discourage and even break screen addiction, rather than cultivate it.

The possibilities are endless.

Any volunteers? ;)


yes, a lot of the issues around this come because of the lack of dignity.

Both in the case of drugs and short form vertical video.

There's a lot of stuff which may loosely be termed "vices", e.g. alcohol and gambling, which have the property:

- many people never touch

- many people indulge without significant harm, getting enjoyment from the process

- some people over indulge messily

- a few people get their lives completely ruined, or ruin the lives of those around them

Then there's an uncomfortable, unreconcilable tension between the desire to punish/prevent the last group by banning the thing, versus the second group entirely reasonably saying that it's not a problem for them.


To be fair, sobriety has the same property; so does feature-length landscape-oriented cinema; so does involvement in religious and political affairs.

Many things that people get up to ostensibly "of their own accord" have these four groups of outcomes, in different proportions. Makes you figure.

I'm of the opinion that the main problem has always been the increasing powerlessness of the individual in the face of mass social phenomena that camouflage as "your life now" but are instead someone's viral PR campaign. In Germany this stuff passed in 10ish years, in Russia it passed in 80ish; California still countin'


Yes.

Would you prefer that they do it without dignity?

I would prefer they don't do it at all, unless there's a medical urgency.

Ah yes, a reply in true hacker fashion, if people only were that binary. Just don't use, then addiction wouldn't be a thing! Problem solved. We can see it all around, the now 55 years war on drugs has been a great success!

I'm not sure if you ever had to deal with someone addicted close to you, but it is heartbreaking. They are already ashamed of themselves and suffer. The last thing you want to do is take away their dignity, because that shuts them out and puts the path to recovery even further. They are still humans you know, just with a problem. They need help, not a trashing. That they are already doing to themselves.


That’s what I said, though? If they’re addicted and working on their addiction – there’s a medical reason why they do it. If they’re shooting heroin for fun, then they’ll get nothing but scorn from me.

> heroin ... with dignity

That discussion is already over since, what... 20 years? Heroin addicts get their fix from the state, with tax payer money, in many many countries these days. I can see the line waiting in front of my pharmacy every day in the morning...


I love love love how you deny people both their enjoyment and their dignity. You are a truly moral person; I hope you have numerous progeny.

> I love love love how you deny people both their enjoyment and their dignity. You are a truly moral person; I hope you have numerous progeny.

Only enjoyment from drugs, they're free to do it with dignity without enjoyment.


The point is, you don't have a say in this.

Sure I do. I don’t have a say in how they spend their time, but if I catch a whiff that someone is doing hard drugs for fun then I’m going to treat them differently than someone addicted and going through a rehab.

Yes.

That’s nonsense. Nobody asked for algorithmic feed pushing schizo agenda on you.

Of course we did. We all switched from early social media sites that didn't employ such algorithms to those that did, and when new social media platforms came around we progressively moved to more algorithmic ones. Hell half the reason I switched from myspace to facebook was the opportunity to do all the facebook quizzes which were just "let's see how much information I can feed the algorithm". We all want a steady stream of content we find personally interesting and engaging, why wouldn't we? Our issue with most of these sites is when the algorithm fails to give us what we want, and we complain "I didn't ask to see this" but the fact is we are asking to see something, and we receive it often enough to stay on these platforms.

> Of course we did. We all

Speak for yourself. I was quite content with the separation of social life and video platforms/engagement media. And don't make it sound like poor Facebook was forced to invent algorithm because of users.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: