Python requires less lines of code (much less?). Comparing Ruby with Python wouldn't shock me.

Really depends on what you're doing, and how you write the Rust. I'd never claim this is always true, but Rust can be pretty concise depending on what you're doing. See this previous comment of mine, which links to some others with an example I've evolved over time on this forum: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42312721

It still means less real-time and less interactive and likely more costly. Separating front and server is not a bad thing even if it brings some kind of duplication.

With .cljc files you can avoid the duplication anyway.

Htmx is the exact opposite of what they're talking about. There are two concepts here: how you render and where you keep state.

HTMX is real time in the sense that it updates over the wire, but you're still keeping all state on the server side.

I don't want to reload the page to open a drawer. You'll notice HN isn't exactly mobile friendly because that requires hiding enough options that you need drawers or other ways to shrink and expand. You can do that with CSS, but that's still state, just state localized to that page load.

And there are sites that have unavoidably complex session state. You can have a resource that's on half the pages but is expensive to compute. I don't want to load it every time when almost none of it changes. I don't want to cache it on the server if it's a big payload

There's a world of difference between no state and over bloated SPAs

you might want to consider fixi, our ultra-minimalist implementation of general hypermedia controls:

https://github.com/bigskysoftware/fixi

> I think we need to consider what the end goal of technology is at a very broad level.

"we" don't control ourselves. If humans can't find enough energy sources in 2200 it doesn't mean they won't do it in 1950.

It would be pretty bad to lose access to energy after having it, worse than never having it IMO.

The amount of new technologies discovered in the past 100 years (which is a tiny amount of time) is insane and we haven't adapted to it, not in a stable way.

This is undeniably true. The consequences of a technological collapse at this scale would be far greater than having never had it in the first place. For this reason, the people in power (in both industry and government) have more destructive potential than at any time in human history by far. And they do not act like they have little to no awareness of the enormous responsibility they shoulder.

I've had job interviews where pay wasn't mentioned at all. That was weird. Can't tell what would have happened next.

That's not uncommon. Companies like to pay as little as possible (usually).

Often, the interviewing manager is explicitly instructed not to discuss pay, and HR negotiates it. The managers aren't trusted to do so.

Basically everything that comes built-in a browser has to be perform well in most use-cases and most devices. We don't want an extra 5% quality at the cost of degraded performance.

As someone who speaks English but doesn't live in the US or any other English-speaking country, this game is hard! I wish there was one for my native language and country culture to see the difference it makes.

i'm a native english speaker and even i can't complete most of these because it's so US-centric. this is virtually unplayable for non-americans, which is a shame because it's a really good game.

Agreed - I went through a few past ones, and unfortunately it just felt like you had to be fairly familiar with US products, landmarks, etc

I loved the concept, just not some of the clues

That's not the worst thing. Having more work means you're less bored. You probably won't be payed more though. But being too productive can cause you to have no next task, wich isn't the same thing as having free time.

I think that's part of the reason why devs like working from home and not be spied on.

You’re saying companies don’t get information on how remote employees utilize their time? I could almost be sure many companies do that.

Didn't even see we could scroll until I read this. Clicked on examples instead.

What you are talking about is inflation, which is due to more demand or lower supply. Lowering demand or raising supply is the solution. Since lowering demand is anti-human it seems raising supply is the only way.

Except people don't eat money, so raising supply needs to be done in a way that won't kill the economy.

It's a brilliant game for sure. The randomness, the fact that it's not turned-based and the multiplayer also make it interesting compared to chess. However Chess has 1000x simpler rules that never change, and you don't need high APM to play competitively.