>The whole WASM story is confusing to me.

Think of it as a backend and not as library and it clicks.

A "parser" is the piece of software that translates unstructured input (usually text) into structured output that better reflects the runtime of a programming language. A "security bug" in a parser is normally construed to be the existence of an input that causes the software to do something incorrect/undocumented/unexpected.

Nothing in the article discusses a parser or anything like a parser bug.

The article doesn't like that the semantics of the user-facing API wrapped around the parser is, I guess, "easy to make mistakes with". That's an article about API design, at most. But that's boring and specious and doesn't grab clicks, so they want you to think that Go's parsers are insecure instead.

Not related to the article, but after years of using Rust, it still is a pain in the ass. While it may be a good choice for OS development, high frequency trading, medical devices, vehicle firmware, finance software, or working on device drivers, it feels way overkill for most other general domains. On the other hand, I learned Zig and Go both over a weekend and find they run almost as fast and don't suffer from memory issues (as much as say Java or C++).

The issue is names.

Every darn little thing in Java needs a name.

If there is no good name, that's a hint that maybe you don't need a new type.

Obligatory Clojure example:

    (defn full-name [{:keys [first-name last-name]}] 
          (str first-name " " last-name))

This defines a function named `full-name`. The stuff between [] is the argument list. There's a single argument. The argument has no name. Instead it is using destructuring to access keys `:first-name` and `:last-name` of a map passed in (so the type of the unnamed argument is just Map)

This function works for anything that has a key `:first-name` and `:last-name`.

There's no need to declare a type ObjectWithFirstNameAndLastName. It would be quite silly.

I forget exactly who said it but somebody said something along the lines of “venture capital is rocket fuel, unless you have a rocket it will only blow up your engine. Have a Bugatti Veyron? It will blow up your engine.”

This is also something DHH has been saying for years. However, I think it is more true now than ever. With how easy it is to start and scale a software company I really struggle to understand the justification for venture funding at the earliest stage, unless you want to larp as a founder, have low conviction, or just want “the experience”.

Engineering/inventing ways to emit less CO2 is fixing the root cause of the problem.

Spending energy that likely came from fossil fuel burning to "capture" CO2 is like saying you've found a perpetual motion machine. The engineering is simpler for this in some ways, but it's still not really a "good" solution.

I agree organic capture is a good idea, and CHEAPEST thing we could do to have an impact dump iron into the open ocean to spawn a phytoplankton bloom, but there is no money to be made doing that.

Can you kindly make a real word example that is not usual Maybe or Either example, that uses user defined data type?

I understand how Applicative works, but I don’t know how to apply (pun intended) to my data types.