This poor soul. There are few protocols I hate implementing more than WebRTC. Getting a simple client going means you need to quickly acclimate to SDP, TURN/STUN, ice-candidates, offers, peer-to-peer protocols, and the complex handshake that is implemented from scratch each time. I can't imagine re-writing the whole trenchcoat of protocols and unintended "best-practices".
I'll take a contrarian view here. Disclaimer: I'm interpreting "safe" as in "usability". I've been driving Ubuntu for years for gaming purposes, and it's come a long way. Most drivers are installed out-of-the box. The apps I care about run just fine.
But.... Relative to MacOS Ubuntu is certainly not as user-friendly. It's worth noting that Linux distros will force you to confront the command line at some point. If you come from OS-es where the most technical thing you have to do is pop open settings to set screen-share permissions or "right-click -> open" to install a package, you'll notice a stark difference.
What the author touches on with before and after "declarative thinking" is largely applicable to all Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) workflows, and not just signals. They are 100% correct that there is a mental shift. Yes, you can use magic to implicitly declare your DAGs with signals. You can also be really explicit with dependencies.
DAG-based workflows incur a cost in terms of complexity, but there are a few advantages to using DAGs instead of sequential.
1. Parallelism becomes inherently built-in
2. It's easier for a new developer to understand the direct dependencies of a node on other nodes (compared to sequential). Sometime in the future, a developer may want to split off a task or move it up/downstream of other tasks.
3. Fault tolerance & recovery becomes easier. Just because 1 step fails, doesn't mean that the whole workflow must come to a halt.
I have aphantasia, and today I learned that I also have SDAM.
There are benefits. For example, I find that I have no issue forgiving people. It's more work for me to harbor a grudge. I don't relive the burden of that initial pain of betrayal when someone close to me harms me, so it's easy to forgive and literally forget.
What is it about React that you hate? React has been the near defacto framework for frontend development for a decade now [1]. Like it or not, it's not going away anytime soon.
The Australian and the USA's immigration system are substantially different in terms of underlying values. The Australian system assigns points based on skill and merit. The US has an emphasis on reuniting families, a lottery system, and difficulty through ambiguity. Anecdotally, my friend who immigrated from Silicon Valley to Australia was able to explain his process to me in about an hour. In contrast, I have had the USA system explained to me many times, and it still hasn't clicked. I can't help but to feel like this is by design.
As for our (USA's) housing crisis, the New York Times had a podcast about that just four days ago [1]. There are some notable parallels to what you have described. TL;DR: The 2008 recession pushed us from building 2.2 million houses a year to 600K, for the last 20ish years. The skilled laborers and tradesmen who used to build houses have closed shop. Now here we are years later and millions of houses short with no clear way to reboot the industry.
I think the author has a point with one-way doors slowing down the adoption of distributed systems. The best way to build two way doors is to push for industry adoption of a particular API. In theory the backend of these APIs matter little to me, the developer, so long as they are fast and consistent. Some examples that come to mind is that Apache Beam is a "programming model" for Data pipelines, Akka is a "programming model" for stateful distributed systems, OpenTelemetry for logging/telemetry, and Kubernetes for orchestration. Oh, and local development is a strong preference.
You're describing the parallelized web-scraper that they pointed to their own internal site? Yeah that was fun. Too bad everyone got the same question.
Link warning, this site a rather quite aggressive fishing scam. The Google Ad displays that the link will resolve to "www.nytimes.com", however it instead redirects to a [spam fishing site](https://lpeedxcddfgffdsxxxzzs.z13.web.core.windows.net/index...).