Readit Newsmanigandham commented on TypeScript 5.2's new keyword: 'Using' totaltypescript.com/types... · Posted by u/Lwrless
This is really true. I feel somehow the problem came when the functional programming gang hijacked it and forced ES6 on us. Promises were so counter intuitive they had to create shortly after async / wait...
Don't get me wrong there are alot of great things in ES6, but it was not quite the same language after...
async/await and promises are both just syntax on top of yield/generators.
Most programming languages are just different syntax on top of the same core primitives.
> "What absolutes?"
"Trillion dollar corporations should give their users all the choice and flexibility they want, not the other way around." is an absolute.
> "This sounds like you."
My 5 year old would respond with a better comeback than "I know you are, but what am I?"
> "Saying that the iPhone can't do the thing today that we want it to do in the future is just repeating a fact that is literally the reason for the discussion in the first place."
Who the fuck are we?! Have you asked iPhone users? Or just your immediate circle? No. We is the arrogant, opinionated "power users" and tech-commenters that think that the know what is best for everyone else.
> "And yes it's strange to take the side of a trillion-dollar megacorp instead of users, especially considering the size and power of such a company."
I'm not. I'm siding with the status quo, which is a considerably safer environment for the vast majority of iPhone users (yes, including me, a actual user of the software and hardware made by the megacorp) than that of what your are espousing.
At least I know not to invest in your fund, especially given your aversion to businesses that make money.
> "My 5 year old would respond with a better comeback" "No. We is the arrogant, opinionated "power users" and tech-commenters that think that the know what is best for everyone else."
What are you doing? Why is this discussion so triggering for you? You made the initial accusation and failed to see that it describes you.
The "we" is the commenters here talking about features they want, representing themselves and others, just like millions of other users who also have their own specific needs. The discussion is about why these features should exist, the benefits they bring, and the effects they might have.
Do we need to poll a billion users to discuss any functionality? Isn't Apple itself also just a few people deciding on changes that affect billions, while adding features that might only support a small minority? If someone says they want bigger buttons or slower animations, is that invalid because they're saying "what is best for everyone else" or are they just talking about what they want and why?
> "I'm siding with the status quo"
Cool, so just say that and make your argument. Many others have said similar things and there's been plenty of discussion about how this would affect the vast majority. But why get upset and call everyone arrogant because they have a different need or opinion? That's neither helpful nor productive.
> "At least I know not to invest in your fund, especially given your aversion to businesses that make money."
This is juvenile. Maybe take a break from the internet if you need to make personal attacks over this. We're also not open to outside money, perhaps if you weren't anonymous we can help you with investments more fit for you.
I have a problem with any kind of absolutes. I also have a problem with a self-appointed tech commenters deciding what is best for everyone else due to their own biases. There is essentially a Google/Apple duopololy, but let's not pretend there are no other choices. Neither company is stopping anyone buying Fairphones, Pinephone, or whatever other libre devices exist on the market if that's what the individual wants.
> "I have a problem with any kind of absolutes."
What absolutes?
> "I also have a problem with a self-appointed tech commenters deciding what is best for everyone else due to their own biases."
This sounds like you.
> "but let's not pretend there are no other choices."
Nobody is confused by the current choices. Saying that the iPhone can't do the thing today that we want it to do in the future is just repeating a fact that is literally the reason for the discussion in the first place.
And yes it's strange to take the side of a trillion-dollar megacorp instead of users, especially considering the size and power of such a company.
manigandham commented on How Canva saves Amazon S3 costs canva.dev/blog/engineerin... · Posted by u/kenaqshal
>> moving from AWS to onprem means you need to configure the infrastructure yourself; you save on AWS fees but you spend more on devops
This is the traditional “sell” for cloud computing and I don’t buy it at all.
The clouds would have you believe it doesn't make sense to run your own systems because you need too much specialist expertise to run your own systems.
The clouds sales pitch is the if you go cloud then you don’t need all these specialists.
That’s rubbish. Cloud operations need the same or more headcount if technical specialists, they’re just doing different things.
The old “don’t run your own systems, it’s cheaper and easier to go cloud” is just sales fiction.
Don’t believe it.
There are hundreds of factors for each company and application. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t, but it’s rarely as simple as retail prices.
Even the same number of "technical specialists" doesn't mean it's the same if one option lets you move faster or remain more reliable.
iOS/iPad OS? Not hard. I'll rephrase, how does what you want benefit the iOS/iPad ecosystem as it stands?
> "iOS/iPad OS? Not hard."
Using vague terms like "the platform" are not useful. What does an operating system like "iOS/iPad OS" have to do with the "iOS/iPad ecosystem"? You're not clear even in your own reply. Please try to be more precise.
I'll assume what you're really asking is from the perspective of Apple since the benefit for users is clear - it'll help make more apps available which has network effects of more Apple devices and usage.
If you’re upset that something you bought does not do something that it was never advertised it could do, and in fact is notorious for not doing, then the problem is squarely on your side. Plenty of people did know what they were buying into.
Complaining is one thing, saying that their users, overall, are unhappy with the product requires at least some serious references and a good narrative.
Nobody here is confused. We know what devices we bought, and we know what they do and don't support today. That's the point. Otherwise there wouldn't be a discussion in the first place to talk about what they can, and likely should do.
And that's what this is - a discussion (on a discussion forum). If you're upset that you people don't share your views, the problem is squarely on your side. Plenty of people can understand and discuss the topic though.
> "But scale is a quality on its own and should be taken into consideration."
Why?
Because the scale of these companies gives them immense power and control over people's devices and (digital) lives. The size of the corporation leads to a geometric increase of power through network effects.
Now that you have an answer, what are you actually trying to ask? Do you have an issue with megacorps providing more control to users?
These people are perfectly able to do it right now, just by buying another device. If you don’t like that something lacks features you think are important, you just don’t buy it. How does it matter to you what other people do with their phone? It’s not like Android is in danger of disappearing or anything
I don’t care what other people do with their phone. Why do you care so much that I want to be able to do more with my iPhone?
When I open YouTube I’m always distracted by the recommendations on the initial screen, and then I never get around to the Watch Later list. So it’s nice when Watch Later videos show up on the initial screen.
I wish I could tell it to consistently show me one or two Watch Later videos on the initial screen rather than doing so seemingly at random.