drpyser22

No language is perfect, thats kind of the point of the author going from erlang to gleam to rust.

How does it all work?

Did you compare nix to npm? Is there a good comparison out there?

The intended userbase of pass is clearly not non-tech-savvy/non-security aware philipinno mothers, so your remark is irrelevant.

You mean that bash interprets the path and creates the socket itself?

Do you need a whole OS, or just a specialized WM/Display manager? I assume a text based interface(e.g. console) world be the simplest to support?

The two parts article does acknowledge inefficiencies and losses, but dismisses them

According to the article author it requires costly infrastructure on the moon, compared to their proposal of beaming energy through microwave from Earth.

I disagree that naming something correctly always takes no time. Sometimes a useful and correct name is non-obvious, or repetitive, or you're trying to name something abstract or generic.

Never? That's such a defeatist/pessimistic take. Looks like its way more difficult than expected, sure. Looks like new breakthroughs will be needed maybe. Never seems unreasonable, in general and in specific.

Types make expectations on behavior explicit instead of implicit. They nay not feel needed when you feel like you master the language, but they sure do help communicate and quickly grok some aspects of the code without having to interpret it in your head(which might be easy when you've just written it but less so in many situations).

What would you consider a sensible solution? What about * Pip-tools(requirements.in + requirements.txt) * Poetry (pyproject.toml+poetry.lock) * Pipenv(Pipfile+Pipfile.lock)

Those and others enable easy declaration of direct dependencies and compile (resolve) a lock file of the actual dependency graph with hashes. Those tools have their issues and idiosyncrasies, but the dependency declaration aspect seems sensible and functional.

Programming certainly can follow standardized design and implementation methodologies. I don't think there is anything fundamental about software engineering that prevents that. It doesn't usually happen because there's not enough agreement on all levels of what is the best methodology. Software engineering is young and still sees significant evolution. Principles of software design and engineering are largely agreed upon and applied, but not in a single, concrete and consistent standard because experts still disagree too much on the specifics of applying those principles, and on other controversial principles.

And of course there is often no regulations that would require and guarantee the application of such a standard, and no standardized QA by customers.

C is understood to be a footgun not worth the risks for most common usages. There are better choices nowadays.

You know that wasn't the point. If there wasn't as much investment in browsers and web tech, and as much money-making potential to motivate those investments, do you think the technology would be where it is?

Adding spiciness is not adding pure capsaicin seasoning. Spicy peppers have flavor, but you don't taste it if all you can focus on is the pain. As tolerance to capsaicin grows, so does appreciation for the flavor underneath the heat.

That's subjective. It clearly interests lots of people.

Do you know for a fact that cutting carbon emissions will bring more rain to those places that are drying up? How quickly? How much time will it take between everyone getting reasonable and stopping carbon emissions, and climate actually turning around in our favor?

Its too late for warning about carbon emissions. Sure, we need to address it to not worsen future issues, but it's not going to solve our current and impending problems. Am i mistaken?

Lots of things are shocking if true. Without context this sounds like a nutty conspiracy theory painting doctors as a eugenist death cult.

I guess the issue is that for lot of commercial work, "good enough, cheaper" is more attractive than "better than most, at the right price". Of course that's not a rule always, everywhere, but at scale it tends to be.

Always back to the same debate then. Why aren't human minds glorified functions, that perhaps deserve their glory a bit more than current state of AI? Obviously they're not currently equivalent. But obviously there are similarities.

The people producing the food get paid. A third party might pay for the feeding of those who cannot pay. Or money accumulated might get redistributed to enable everyone to afford it.

What if you haven't worked with AWS, but managed to get an AWS cert as stand-in to get you a chance at a job which relies on AWS?

> people that believe differently from me and the majority, and their religious freedom, are not relevant to me and my idea of a functioning society

Fixed that bigotry for you.

Do you mean that there is a silver bullet,or that innovations don't add together to provide solutions?

Cheaper electricity pushes the market to favor electric heating over gas. The cost of switching from a gas furnace to an electric one will be worth it if gas becomes more expensive and electricity cheaper.

If you fix a bug that currently causes few crashes but would later on turn out to cause big issues, and you see that outcome in advance, then it would in fact be smart wouldn't it?

Irrelevant to you maybe? Looking at others for reference and comparison is standard practice. Also, i assume this hackernews community involves a number of European people.

For a wealthy person, maintaining status/perceptions and relationships may be worth more than the value of interests gained on a small loan(relative to their wealth). Cultural mores can certainly have more influence on behavior than raw rational self-interest. On a larger scale, greed may win out, but I can believe that in a limited scale of a particular social strata of a particular culture this can be sustainable.