The problem is you end up paying More for what you want because what you want doesn't align with everyone else. These cars are massed produced, so anything deviating from the popular norm ends up becoming custom and costing more, even if the custom design is less complex then the popular design.
Given that everyone else wants those bells and whistles, ironically you get more by paying less which means logically more bells and whistles is the better deal.
A logical person would in turn want the cars with "too much stuff". That is unless you're willing to pay more for less stuff.
>I promise, installing a Jetbrains product on a traffic controller (which is what I was thinking of re: the field trip) would be a tremendous amount of work.
Jetbrains isn't installed on a traffic controller. It's installed on your local machine. Both VSCode and jetbrains have something called "remote development" which allow you to develop on a remote machine as if it was local. It's similar to ssh and vim.
>Yes, and they're one geomagnetic storm away from being entirely useless. It might not be for everybody, but there's value in being able to work with a lean toolset.
A geomagnetic storm will render everything useless, I don't see how a vim user will be more protected then a vscode user.
>How is this any different from farm machinery 200 years ago or industrial automation 50 years ago? More production with far less people.
The economy will for sure eventually get into some sort of equilibrium again. Things will become normal sort of like how the giant wealth inequality gap is super normal right now (likely caused by the same automation you're describing).
But there is so much different now then before. Additionally the velocity in which this replacement is occuring is much higher then industrial automation. Given the differences we cannot fully know the outcome.
It's easy and convenient to allude to examples in the past to predict the future, but that is not a data driven or logical conclusion. We don't know what will happen, and to ignore the possibility of a bad outcome is folly.
My wild guess is that there will be a temporary period of destabilization and this temporary period could last between one to two decades all the way to several generations. By then all the "problems" will be normalized; sort of like how the wealth inequality gap has been normalized and how it's basically become normal to see tons and tons of homeless people living in RVs in the bay area.
These studies aren't done wholistically and only done from a business perspective. That's why these studies are garbage they fail to account for the feedback effect.
Employers pay money to workers so that workers in turn can buy products from employers.
These studies only account for how much money Employers save when they get rid of workers and pay less money to workers.
Well when you get rid of workers or pay them less there's less money going around for workers to buy things from employers. These studies fail to account for this feedback.
It's the tragedy of the commons. If one company utilizes generative AI to reduce labor costs that company benefits. If all companies collectively do this, then everyone loses. It's the aggregate behavior of all companies acting in their own interest that ultimately causes them all to act against their own interests.
It doesn't have code completion. You can install it as a feature, but vim itself doesn't have that feature. There needs to be a law for someone either flat out lying or not knowing what they're talking about because godwin's law doesn't apply here.
Additionally installing these features on vim is a nightmare for various reasons. It can be done, and I've done it, but the experience is not as good as the more clunkier GUI IDEs. I'm all for a TUI IDE if the experience was as automated or seamless as jetbrains or M$, but such a app doesn't exist yet.
>Sometimes it's faster to fix the code where the bug is, rather than trying to recreate it in your cushy dev environment
Sometimes, but with single powerful IDE solutions from companies like jetbrains, setting up a "cushy" environment is barely any work.
>Sometimes that means driving somewhere and working through at 9600 baud over an RS-232 cable. Do this a couple times and you'll find that vi is quite usable--you just have to want it to be.
Of course if your network connections completely fail you have to use the serial console to fix it. There's no going around that. But the majority of developers don't even need to do this or don't even know what you're talking about as they only interact with cloud services nowadays.
Additionally a "cushy" environment doesn't preclude you from using serial console or using vim to do edits everywhere. VI in this sense is barely useable, it's basically the baseline necessity. You need it when all else fails. But it's not good to have it as your daily driver.
Except I'm sure that book fails to mention many examples where the long tail worked and instead focuses on where the long tail failed and biases it's own story around that.
Jetbrains suite of IDEs are basically long tails and they have huge utility in many areas that exceed other editors.
It's barely useable. I rely a lot on code completion, search capabilities and syntax checking while I code. It just saves a lot of time from having to execute the compiler and wait for it to check everything.
With good "plugins" or "features" all of these things happen async.
That's because they call you "Daddy" in the bedroom.
There's actually sort of a real reason for this. In the traditional monogamous or even polygamous relationship throughout human history it's usually the Male taking care of the female. Women when seeking a relationship are sort of searching for a caretaker that has sort of father like qualities of having enough resources to take care of them, taking a dominant role... etc.
The relationship most similar to it is father and daughter I can sort of see why the linguistics have sort of merged.
Obviously, in the last century, things have changed and the etiquette of relationship dynamics need to be spoken of in a way that's more egalitarian.
But you can't completely deny millions of years of human anthropological behavior. If men usually played more dominant/caretaker roles in relationships in the majority of civilizations, then along that timescale certain behaviors become a bit ingrained biologically through natural selection. It's not surprising to see these attributes creep into language.
This language is unconventional for business even in the 90s. Additionally men wouldn't talk this way in front of women in Any time.
The difference now is it's less culturally accepted to talk like this even in casual situations even when just among men.
Plenty women objectify men by wealth and status and they refer to men this way even publicly. The cultural change is mostly one sided, skewed more towards not offending women.
For example, referring to men as Hunks or Chads is just not offensive at all. In fact it's a compliment. I feel it's almost entitlement if a girl gets offended by being called a babe.
I mean I could say C++ is just python with memory management macros.
We're getting into the domain of opinion here. I would say TS is different enough such that it's two different languages.
Programming with type checking and programming with plain JS is really different. A programmer without experience in types (ie plain JS) won't be able to pick up types that that quickly on average. Things like enums, Generics, sum types, product types, recursive types, really change the game by restricting what functions can do.
JS was designed in a week. He's completely right, it's just poorly designed. Javascript will always be around because of technical debt and habit. But that doesn't change the fact that Douglas is right.
Also nobody really uses javascript anymore. It's completely insane. We compile Typescript into javascript then run javascript. That should tell you something about javascript.