rvikmanis

No

How does that make sense?

Sorry for straying, but can I get an invite?

Is this a joke?

As randycupertino pointed out, my comment was about teenagers being ridiculous. That is hardly newsworthy, but the extent to which the social-media-industrial complex has elevated this nonsense, should be.

Society, by dismantling the old illiberal structures (which I agree, were pretty bad) and offering no real substitutes, has done great harm to its future generations.

I don't think this article was meant to be particularily insightful on its own.

Its purpose might be to bootstrap the insight machinery, which it accomplished, evidently.

This Hegelesque style of verbosity is not productive speech. It does entice me to reply though, but it looks snobbish and manicured.

Indeed. For example, I am deeply amazed at how in Flux and many of its derivatives Actions are not executable behaviours, but messages describing an action to be performed, while ActionCreators are the actual, well.. "actions".

Thanks!

As someone with FRP experience, what do you think is the minumum viable set of functional transformers (like map, filter etc.) that should be implemented for a library like this?

* A single store is not enough.

But seriously, Fastflux just continues further in the logical direction established by Redux (and arguably React itself) -- a more reactive approach to software development.

Fastflux does this by using an implementation of the Observable FRP primitive as a superclass for stores and actions.

Also reduction of boilerplate.

A support channel is now online at #fastflux on Freenode IRC.

Hey guys, feedback welcome. And I'll try to anwser any questions you may have.

For instance: "Do we need yet another flux library?"

Well, why not? The ecosystem is still evolving. By bringing in more ideas and refined approaches, we may well reach equilibrium sooner.

Protip: publish on npm

Interestingly enough, this man served in the army together with Kim Il-Sung and Peng Dehuai.

Could be killer if combined with electron.

> Thought is more fluid; putting it into words concretizes it, collapses the possibilities of the waveform. Somewhat, formalizes it.

That is a very good description.

I discussed this topic with a colleague recently, and we both agreed that putting thoughts into words takes conscious effort. Though I suspect that is not so for the majority of people, whose default mode of thinking is distinctly verbal, even when not talking or writing.

> whole lot of societies which made different choices and people were free to move between them

The internet is a lot like that. Maybe someday this can be a model for the world at large.