Bad advice. Yes there should be at least one other person who knows what you're doing, but if you're experienced in the matter, solitude is the best practice. The emergency contact person could be a phone call away, just in case.

Like others have already said, it’s an accessibility nightmare. On the other hand, it’s not like this is going away anytime soon – maybe screenreaders could learn to understand and read some such “fonts” (e.g. bold/italic at least)?

  <span aria-label="my text">𖢑ꚲ 𖢧𖤟𖤗𖢧</span>

It’s a long time ago now so my recollection is likely very flawed, but with HL I didn’t like the feeling of a created path that must be followed, irrespective how of the interleaving of different aspects. There are lots of modern games like this too - which on the face of it are relatively open-world, but underneath the apparent freedom there’s a strict path to find and follow for success. (I’d definitely include one of the modern Doom games —I forget which it was I tried— in this category, - it was so linear that it felt but one step removed from the old-fashioned shooters where you’re literally on a conveyor belt and shoot whatever appears.)

In the original Doom, in contrast, the only requirement was to make it to the end of the level, figuring out the map and puzzles along the way. Anything else (did you chase 100% kill and 100% secrets?) was optional. I guess it just felt more… honest?

This is just people's subconsciousness fighting against the rolling progress. It's trying to avoid learning new things and trying to preserve the status quo where you can keep rolling using the already acquired knowledge. It's anti-thetical to being a hacker.

The modern way is to use LLMs to auto generate all this code and do some small corrections in the process. So you wouldn't have to worry about the underlying tech and would only be concerned about the core functionality and actual mechanics of the product rather than being interested and spending efforts on memorization of the specific instructions for the machine. The whole evolution of the programming languages is a process in that direction and new technologies that were embraced by the newer generation like React and Vue.js is the way to go. You can't run geosites forever.

I view JQuery as similar to C in some ways: It's been around forever, it's mature, and it works. It gives a good experience to get something up and running quickly: it's lightweight and simple.

But if you're working on bigger projects: It is possible, but have have to be very principled in how you use it, otherwise you're going to end up with either a massive spaghetti codebase and lots of edge cases in your app that breaks.

Alternatives like React and Rust may add more complexity upfront, but the improved structure and safety it gives has big benefits in all but the smallest projects.

You can print things off the web.

> For many reasons, that's just too big, we have folks in Europe that can't even clone the repo due to it's size.

I read that as an anecdote, a more complete sentence would be "We had a story where someone from Europe couldn't clone the whole repo on his laptop for him to use on a journey across Europe because his disk is full at the time. He has since cleared up the disk and able to clone the repo".

I don't think it points to a larger issue with Europe not being able to handle 180GB files...I surely hope so.

In my admittedly little experience with shadow DOM, it doesn't isolate as much as it claims. CSS variables pierce the boundary, so if your styles are built around that, you can still run into trouble.

I just haven't seen any benefit whatsoever once you have CSS modules. And CSS layers help too.

Is this less true of Web Components?

I've worked with a lot of different tech stacks over my career and every single one of them has required understanding the internals once you start using them seriously. I haven't found React to be substantially worse for that than any other tech stack I've used.