I sure as hell hope so. I cannot stand the private gardens that are the app stores. But, there are some problems to solve.
* Illusion of portability. Web apps need to be less of web sites and yet still appear as portable as phone apps. Commercial web site apps still feel like private gardens hoarding your private data. Seriously, is there is any real privacy benefit comparing Facebook versus the Apple App Store.
* Web apps tend to be shiny in appearance but heavy and clunky under the hood. We need to get away from this unnecessary abstraction layer framework bullshit. If you ask the developers about it you get back first person pronoun based answers like you are talking to autistic people or small children. This is a huge cause of complaint from everyone on the planet that isn’t a web developer.
* In the early days of the web the motto was “content is king”. This has not been true for a very long time, and yet the powers that be still try to force it. Most people just want better software, as in an application that accomplishes something more than saying something. This is what makes the app stores so dramatically better for most users, but web developers still haven’t gotten that memo.
Writing. AI may eventually replace developers that cannot write original applications but it will not replace the people who can. Stop toying with frameworks and tools. Instead start writing original applications from the ground up.
At some point between the ages 17 to 24 the prefrontal cortex develops a circuit directly to the limbic system. The result is an aggression regulator that did not exist prior. The age thing was discovered by looking at violent crime rates correlated against age and affirmed by physiological research of the brain.
I don’t think this will work the way the administration thinks it work. They can dictate where the military will deploy but they cannot dictate the conduct of the military once they arrive. In fact, this might prove to be extremely counterproductive to the authoritarian objectives the administration is hoping for.
The Secretary of Defense is a loyalist and will likely put people in charge of the operation who are on board with the mission to suppress protest.
There's also just the chaos angle. From the same New Yorker article I linked elsewhere in this thread, I thought this anecdote was nuts:
> In Los Angeles, for example, [in 1992] there was a situation where marines were accompanying police to a house where there was a domestic disturbance and the police officers said to “cover me” as they went into the house. “Cover” means something very different in the Marines, and they opened fire on the house. It was only by good fortune that no one was killed.
The people in charge of any such operation would be unit commanders, military officers, who have greater legal restrictions on their conduct than either the President or the SECWAR. Regardless of the orders upon them military commanders are obligated to follow the law and are provided legal representatives for clarity.
I'm hopeful that'll be the case. But can SECDEF (it's still called the Department of Defense, regardless of stationery changes) hand-pick the unit commanders and military officers?
Why not? Serious question. The military cannot join law enforcement, Posse Comitatus, and protesters have a right to protest. The military can only take action to limit violence and property destruction. So what happens if law enforcement is the more violent party?
People keep citing law as if this administration has ever respected them. Realize that laws are just pieces of paper with words that are useless without enforcement.
The administration has systematically removed leadership in both the military and the DoJ that aren't ideologues. Case in point: SOUTHCOM
Further, internal DoJ and military checks and balances have been eviscerated for the last 12 months. Specifically military lawyers and inspectors general that are concerned with lawful conduct.
The majority of members of the military are trump supporters.
We've already seen that it's extremely rare for even the national guard to support protesters in their own communities when being deployed against them
We've already seen that the military will willfully follow trump's unlawful orders, including clear violations of international law
Acting unlawfully and then falling back on "just following orders" is far less likely to have negative consequences for soldiers than refusing to follow unlawful orders would
Because the 'protesters' are all riled up against 'the law' and will see these troops as opponents (like they see ICE). They'll attack the troops first and I firmly believe federal troops will respond (in defense) violently and in unison. That's the training.
Minnesota has no clue how serious a can of whoop-ass they're about to pry open.
> U.S forces responding to planned rallies and demonstrations, spontaneous crowds, and civil disturbances must follow the procedures best designed to deescalate crowd actions and to protect life, the rights and safety of the persons involved, and property.
* Don’t stop at just a bachelors degree. Get a masters.
* Don’t bother with a computer science degree. A person that is smart enough can teach themselves to write code. Instead focus on an educational subject of greater learning.
* Be choosy with your school focusing on quality of education in your subject area and not the prestige of name unless you have money to burn and are just there to buy future friends.
Yes, college was absolutely worth it, but then I went to a very inexpensive school.
Just wait until they discover the civilized ancient Greeks were commonly homosexual and even frequently engaged in pedophilia, especially the Spartans.
In all seriousness, I assumed that was part of why the US models itself on Rome rather than Greece. Not that there was no homosexuality in the days of the Roman empire, but there was a lot more performative masculinity to make up for it.
We could have replaced tons of developers if only employers were selective in their hiring and invested in training. Instead there are a ton of hardly marginal developers in employment.
Case in point: web frameworks as mentioned in the article. These frameworks do not exist to increase productivity for either the developer or the employer. They exist to mitigate training and lower the bar so the employer has a wider pool of candidates to select from.
I disagree. A good framework makes code more maintainable, and makes it so you can focus on what’s important or unique to your product. It certainly makes you faster.
That depends on what you are comparing against. If a given developer is incapable of writing an application without a framework then they will certainly be more productive with a framework.
It’s like a bulldozer is certainly faster than a wheelchair, but somebody else might find them both slow.
Eh. I’ve written plenty of applications by hand before there were good frameworks— win32 apps, old school web applications, “modern” SPA-like apps before there was a React. I’m more productive with React + Tailwind than I was with anything (other than maybe VB6). Being able to reason about your UI as a (mostly) pure function of state is powerful. It reminds me of the simplicity of game development— with a proper rendering layer, your developers can focus mostly on modeling their problem rather than UI complexities.
reply