Cloudflare subsidizes the small guys in hopes they'll turn into big guys. Bandwidth isn't that expensive in the first place though, that's just a myth perpetuated by AWS/Azure/Google.
Python is quickly taking the crown for low-barrier to entry, slow, buggy code supported primarily by stackoverflow copy pastes from a never-ending supply of “data scientists”
Quickly seems like an overstatement; you've always been able to write low-barrier to entry, slow, buggy code. Is there a low-barrier language that doesn't end up with a lot of less-than-ideal code samples?
I support over a million lines of powershell. It's pretty hygienic, for the efforts of a hundred low-skill contributors.
The language has flaws. But the function parameters are an joy and incredibly powerful. The validation and type coercion is excellent. The functions are extremely composable.
Overall, it's the epitome of "pit of success".
The same team that has all this powershell also has about 50k lines of Python. The Python has the stench of swamp farts, so I don't think it's team skill that makes the powershell work so well.
Meh, Python really shines at I/O and gluing together C/C++/Fortran code. It's reasonably fast for most tasks, and if it isn't there are tools like Cython that make it pretty trivial to write Python code that achieves C-like execution speed (because it effectively compiles to C code).
I agree that Python is a great glue language (so are Perl and Python).
However, Python really doesn't shine when compared with other memory safe languages like Go, Rust, and Java.
Ultimately, Python is single-threaded by design. There are some hacks to get around this design contraint (multi-processing), but then you are adding an entire additional Python runtime to your system's memory for every "thread" you want to run. Even with asyncio, Python performs the worst when it comes to I/O.
I love Python, but it's important to understand that due to specific design considerations it is not and will likely never be a performant language.
If you can write code twice as fast then you'll write twice as many bugs.
Having been a C++ and python developer I see just as many footguns in both languages and have spent many many many hours dealing with slow, buggy code in either.
There's a lot of nice Python code out there, mostly written by disciplined and experienced systems people.
But I agree about the hordes of data scientists making copy and paste spaghetti. This is evidenced by companies deploying Jupyter notebooks in production, which essentially witnesses the fact that they've given up on getting data people to write quality production Python, and instead they treat their prototype spaghetti as sandboxed blackboxes that can be tested on inputs and deployed if they perform well enough.
I miss it. On the javascript side there was just jquery and a mountain of vanilla js that everyone could at least understand (and no npm dependency issues, ES6+ weirdness, etc) and on the PHP side, all built-in functions were in the global scope (easy to CTRL+F on a single page at a time when search endpoints were quite slow), there were (virtually) no web frameworks (at least I didn't use any until after 2009), and no package management to worry about unless you were doing something weird and/or wrangling with wordpress. As a tween and young teen I had plenty of small web design clients.. local businesses, photographers, etc., and I could build sites 100% from scratch starting from a photoshop mockup to custom PHP/HTML/CSS/JS, 100% no packages or other people's code. Packages have done a ton for us, for sure, but I truly miss those days and feel like we've lost something we'll never get back.
Back then it was actually quite possible to build an entire website or "app" as we call them now from first principles just banging your head against HTML/CSS/JS and whatever server side language you were using. Then the internet grew up, security issues became more prevalent, packages, other people's code, dependency hell, "futures", "promises", server state and client state management, shadow dom, reactivity, etc etc.
All you need is Postgres (OLTP) and if you have large datasets where Postgres falls behind for analytical work, then you reach for Clickhouse (OLAP) for those features (while Postgres remains your primary operational database and source of truth).
Agreed. I have a good bit of experience in SaaS and analytics and that's exactly what I landed on for building Luabase[0]. Postgres (specifically Supabase) for the app database, Clickhouse to run the analytics (which is the product).
Obviously you’re not under a moral obligation to make an argument, but what I think the OP means is if you want to actually convince people, and thus actually reduce the usage of cryptocurrency, then this is how you would do it.
The fact that I think that all cryptocurrencies are worthless in their current form does not mean that I need to convince people at large of this. (I may want to convince my friends, but my friends are generally already convinced.)
The religious argument (I must convert everyone!) resonates most strongly with current true believers. It is the same projection that many Prosperity Gospel Christians feel about atheists wanting to convert them.
I've asked a lot of people what cryptocurrencies are good for, and read many articles on what people think cryptocurrencies are good for, and they never give a satisfactory answer. So: either I haven't asked the right people, or nobody has a good answer. My current prior is about 90% that a good use for cryptocurrency in their current form has yet to be invented, and may never be.
Answers I've seen:
- you can do various crimes.
- you can gamble in many ways.
- you can send cryptocurrency to people in places which have reliable electrical, computing and networking environments but no Western Union or equivalent, and they can use that in place of the local currency with other people who are similarly inclined. (Why you would want to do this is rarely specified.)
- you can have fun being part of competing/cooperating cults.
Regarding your third point, the argument I've heard for it that I sort of understand is if you're living under a crazy dictator (or other less than stable government) who has ruined the local currency and you have no other way to store or transfer your hard earned money. So you resort to crypto.
Is there a name for the phenomenon that just happened here? The GP was speaking from an principled/idealist perspective and you replied with a realpolitik perspective.
I see this a lot in discussions and parties mostly end up talking past each other.
> I don’t need to refute cryptocurrency for the same reason the onus isn’t on me to disprove the existence of god.
If you believe Bitcoin is a terrible idea and/or will eventually be you obviously can abstain from it.
But if you feel significant portions of society are becoming trapped in it, and will reach an unfortunate end result, that is relevant to you. If you live in that shared society the failure of that idea will impact you. If you are concerned about the future impact on you, you have a reason to be concerned about refuting it.
If a bunch of people join a cult, I don't care. If a bunch of people join a cult, and believe that judgement day is at the end of 2022, that they will set fire to all the buildings and people in around them as a test, and their god/leader will protect the true believers leaving them unharmed, I do care. A lot.
So the question isn't do you have an obligation to correct everyone who is wrong. The question is, what are the consequences of the belief continuing to spread, and does it negatively/harmfuly impact society and me as a member.
Yeah thats corny as shit, but the guy is actually trying to improve the country and leave their external debt behind, and remember, he’s in Latin America
