A joke in the aviation industry is that planes will someday become so automated there will just be one pilot and a dog in the cockpit. The dog will trained to bite the pilot if they try to touch the controls.
So I maybe windows users will need a virtual dog to bite copilot if it tries to do anything.
Hmmm… for some reason having 14 beers has made the prospect of having a 15th beer seem like a very good idea.
FFS a government makes a policy on phone security which may or may not be a good decision. OK whatever, who cares?
Ah but that government is Israel. So now this is today’s reason for your daily Two Minutes Hate?
Get a grip people.
The real scam was getting children to do all the research for their encyclopedia.
Yup, it’s definitely just some religious dogma going on there.
You think it’s a good career choice to conform and never question anything so you wind up being indistinguishable from an LLM? Ok, good luck!
A constant inside a function is not constant to the computer. It’s only constant within the scope of the function. So it’s not constant to the computer since every time the function is called the “constant” will have a different value.
Do you even know what a real constant is?
You maybe need to rethink some things.
I’m questioning why things are being done in the way they’re being done and you’re saying I’m being close minded? Also spewing out some more jargon like that’s going to impress me?
And LOL at “it will feel natural after you get used to it.” I don’t think you understand the concept about something feeling natural. Like I say I just make stuff const because someone put some bullshit in the linter. Enforcing dumb rules in a linter is the opposite of keeping an open mind, it forcing preferences on people.
I think I’ve confirmed it’s just FE religious dogma. Just keep on repeating whatever Theo says and people will think you know what you’re talking about.
Stylistically, you’re changing the array when you add something to it. Javascript is a janky language in the best of times, but FE devs like to artificially introduce additional unnecessary complexities on top of the jank.
const is simpler. why would I declare an array as let if I’m not reassigning?
Why would you declare a const that’s going to have different data every time to function is called?
Now I’m thinking it’s a form of gatekeeping. Just an excuse for FE devs to throw out terms like “immutable” to make it sound like they know what they’re taking about. Y’all need to constantly sound like you know what you’re talking about when dealing with users, pretending weird stylistic choices have real technical reasons for them. But the BE devs know what you’re saying is complete bullshit LOL.
Pushing something onto an array isn’t changing the array? It’s not changing the reference to the array, but from a style standpoint it doesn’t make sense.
And if you’re declaring a const within the scope of a function, it’s still allocating memory when it enters the scope and disposing it when it leaves the scope, same as a variable. There’s no performance benefit to do this.
Something like const CONSTANT_VALUE = “This never changes” has a performance benefit and is actually how other languages use constants. The value will always be the same, the compiler understands this and can optimize accordingly. If you’re declaring an iterator or the result of calling a webservice to be const it’ll be a different value every time it runs that code, so it’s not something a compiler can optimize. In style terms, it’s a value that’s different every time you get to that line of code, so why would you want to call it constant?
You’re comment indicates the FE dev obsession with always using const stems from a misunderstanding of how computers work. But of course many religious beliefs originate from a misunderstanding of the world. Whatever man, I just make it a const to make the linter happy, because it’s dumb FE bullshit LOL.
Yeah for whatever reason, FE devs want to make everything a const. It’s like a religious belief or something, it’s really kinda weird.
const fun = () => { const something = “whatever” const array = []; array.push(someting)
for (const thing of array) { if (thing === ‘whatever’) blah(thing) } }
Semicolons? Optional. Which quotes you should use? Whatever you feel like! But you must declare things as a const wherever possible! Even if it’s an array that you’re going to be changing, declare it as a const because you should know that you can push things into a const array, and since it’s possible to declare it as a const, you must declare it as a const.
Why is this? Nobody knows, but it’s important to FE devs that you use const.
Yeah and some clocks have a second hand and some don’t sometimes clocks use roman numerals sometimes they’re arabic numerals, and that’s if it can understand based on context if someone saying just “clock” in the data the scraped is referring to a digital clock or an analog clock.
In general LLMs don’t understand logic, though I suspect they have given some of them ability to run some code validation logic (that’s not actually AI) when you tell it to generate code in some languages. I say this because I’ve had it produce some code that could compile, but it seemingly put some example code into a function and had some other example code that needed to call that function with another parameter so it just created a third function that accepts the additional parameter and calls the first function (throwing away that parameter). It compiles but doesn’t have any understanding of how stupid that is on a logical level. So it seems like it’s just trying stuff until it’s capable of compiling without there being any understanding of how anything works.
Oddly enough it seems like Microsoft themselves that’s working towards breaking the network effect. They are pushing people to use the web versions of their software now and since edge is chromium, their web versions should work in Linux.
In the past Microsoft made most of their money from Windows and Office, but now they make more money off of cloud services so the traditional Windows and Office products are becoming more and more about just driving people to their cloud services. But as they they put more emphasis on cloud services they’re actually making it easier for people to dump Windows, and as they make Windows more about marketing their cloud services, they give people more incentive to dump Windows.
Microsoft is digging the grave for windows.
A fan of manuals, obviously. There are dozens of us!
It’s more likely they have contractual obligations with marketing companies, retailers, data centers, etc. If a product is discontinued they can get out of those obligations. Sure they will write off a loss and reduce the taxes they pay, but it’s not as if a bigger loss nets them more money somehow.
Really what needs to be regulated is all of the excessive exclusive B2B contracts which mean a company can’t just sell a product for a small amount of money to someone to maintain it when they’re done with that product.
It could also hide from predators in an aquarium where it will be brought food every day and get medicine from a veterinarian if it gets sick. An Aquarium is the safest place for the octopus to live, so why wouldn’t it’s survival instinct tell it to live there to hide from predators?
We should set up an experiment with an aquarium that allows the octopus access to the ocean. Do you really think the Octopus would run away from the aquarium where it’s safe from predators and gets fed every day?
Yes and for all we know the octopus prefers to live in a place safe from predators, always has lots of food, and a veterinarian on call when it gets sick.
It’s strange to me that people anthropomorphize animals to make big claims about the animal wanting to live in the wild. If you release that animal into the wild it will likely be eaten or starve but everyone assumes the animal wants that based on absolutely nothing.
Why not anthropomorphize animals under the assumption they would want a life similar to what we’ve built for ourselves? Is the validity of the complete guesses about what an animal wants gain merit based on how holier than thou the people making the guesses are acting about it?
Bottom line, the octopus is safer living in an aquarium with ample food than living in an environment amongst predators where food is scarce. All animals have a strong survival instinct (they’d be extinct if they didn’t) so it’s more likely if an animal could communicate it’s preferences, it would choose the option where it’s most likely to survive for a very long time, so it would choose living in an aquarium.
If a I scream “RELEASING ANIMALS INTO THE WILD IS MURDER!!!” over and over again, does that make it a more compelling argument?
The octopus went back to it’s tank after getting a snack. That’s at least some indication the octopus likes living there.
You are assuming the octopus prefers living out in the wild where it could be eaten alive. Who are you to assume what an animal wants?
Are you currently living in some kind rectangular structure where you have easy access to regular meals? Why are you living in this way and assuming an octopus wouldn’t also prefer this? There’s nothing preventing you from leaving the rectangular structure you’re currently living in and going out into the wilds and fending for yourself to survive. Why don’t you do the thing you’re assuming the octopus wants to do?
Why else did they have four hobbits in the fellowship?
You need a few spare mules in case you gotta put the first one down.
The safe word is “Tiberium.”
The real reason is it’s a pain in the ass to deploy software in Windows. It’s not like you can easily set up a server and put some packages on and have it just automatically apt update to that. Sure there’s some “Enterprise” servers you could set up (and pay license fees for) that might work somewhat like that, but it’s easier to just make it a web app and deploy to an internet webserver.
For product distribution, you need someone download an .exe, hope a virus scanner won’t block it, maybe pay microsoft to sign it or whatever, hope the user has a compatible version of windows, and maybe they can get some working software. But then you have to make some mechanism to handle updates and hopefully that doesn’t get blocked by some security software. So it’s easier to make your software a web application.
Also putting out windows native applications means you might not be able to enshittify it later since people could continue to use the old version forever. It’s weird to assume enshittification happens accidentally, but it’s actually what some companies want to do their software because $$$. They want applications they can enshitty later, they don’t make applications that may work on linux and whoopsie it just somehow got enshittified because of that… somehow.
But many times it’s just best solution. If an application doesn’t need access to anything on my system, I’d rather it be a web app. App does the thing I need, and when I’m done, I close the tab and we’re done. Why install more software on my system if I don’t need to?