You can also have investors that buy into a company because it is counterproductive to their goals. Not all investments are meant to produce financial profit.
I do the same, but it seems that more and more reddit comments are also astroturfed so my faith in them is faltering. Finding authentic recommendations at this point is extremely tiring because I have to constantly be gauging a user's sincerity.
There are too many benefits to fake reviews and few downsides. And it's easy to spam these fake comments and reviews especially if you have the budget for a dedicated marketing team.
While I like the idea of pedestrian areas, it does feel like this is another angle for our elites to prepare the lower classes for austerity. Owning your own home, eating meat, being able to raise a family; all of these are things that our parents and grandparents took for granted but are looking less and less likely to be affordable in the coming decades. Rather than fix our economic issues, the solution seems to be to frame them as unnecessary or even "bad".
On the other hand, available public transportation also increases economic mobility and decreases overall costs of the working poor. The ability to own, park, maintain a car is a large cliff, even in the cheapest of states. The ability to get to most jobs without a car in a reasonable time drastically decreases hurdles to economic mobility.
(and also of the middle class, whether that's the underinsured or carrying insurance against under insured divers.
Same here. Crazy to think that I've been using it for over 15 years and never had a reason to change. I've tried other browsers, but none of them gave me a compelling reason to continue with them.
I think the most probable reason for that has been the complete support for addons that no other browser ever did. For instance, why doesn't Chrome have support for vertical/tree-style tabs without using a separate window? That one feature alone keeps me on firefox. By removing the tab bar at the top of the screen, you regain a significant amount of vertical space on a laptop.
> That one feature alone keeps me on firefox. By removing the tab bar at the top of the screen, you regain a significant amount of vertical space on a laptop.
Last time I tried tree tab, it wasn't possible to remove the tab bar. Has this changed? And if so, would you mind sharing how to do it?
I heard somebody make a similar argument one time in regards to Common Lisp. He said that with Java you would have to wait several years sometimes to get a feature (assuming the language developers actually cared about the feature), but with Lisp, you could just implement the feature yourself. I've always felt this is one of the strongest arguments for using a lisp-style language.
Edit: this is possible too in languages like Elixer and Ruby using macros, but eventually the readability suffers and debugging complex macros in those languages can be a nightmare.
Macros are really powerful constructs that allows you to even change the syntax of the language, which means when they are used you can't trust your previous knowledge of how the language should behave. If you do it correctly you can make a Domain Specific Language that makes your code as readable as the documentation in domains the language was not designed to directly solve (or just generate code for you to avoid boilerplate that would be more unreadable by itself). If you do it incorrectly, you can end up with code you cannot trust or even understand (and language design is a skill that not everyone has in the first place).
About debugging, it is somewhat different from normal debugging since macros are a second layer of abstraction. You have a compile-time phase in which the macros are resolved (receiving code and returning code until there is no macro left) and a runtime in which the final generated code is run. If you only consider the runtime, then you're looking at code that is not the same as you wrote, which makes it indeed hard to see mistakes. But if you separate the concerns of compile and run time you can evaluate both separately most of the time.
Also, Ruby does not have macros. It has a very simple syntax in which everything is an object and all function calls are actually messages that can be interpreted in runtime which allows you to extend the syntax very easily by controlling the dispatch rules. What causes trouble is that classes are open and can be extended freely during runtime, so you cannot know that an object you're calling is not modified by any part of the code (including any library), a practice called monkey patching and usually considered bad practice since it makes code hard to reason about.
Their programs are simple and works well at the job for which they are intended. Why should I not use good software just because the developers' politics are not in vogue?
"Professional journalist" just means you're a blogger that gets paid. And everybody has standards. Some people just like to wave theirs around a little more.
I still use a T420 and T430. Both are great for development use. The screens are lacking, but when you spend most of your time in the terminal or browser, you don't really notice.
I don't get the Russia hate. Sure they have problems as a country, but how does that affect the average user? I would think that since I don't live there I can trust Russian companies more than I can ones in the US.
No, he means Western, including the EU for example, which maintains https://euvsdisinfo.eu/ a site collecting Russian disinformation. Right now because Americans spend two years every four years fighting an election they are focused on the US (although with some border stuff continuing to persuade Ukrainians that actually Russia are the good guys as they continue to invade that country...) but if you go back a few months there's plenty to underscore the destabilising message that the EU are actually Nazis and if only everybody would put Russia in charge that'd be so much nicer...
