Real juice is just fine to drink - in moderation! Before getting some exercise, it's a great boost, has vitamins, easy energy, and it's an excellent bribe. It's also trivial to get juiceboxes that have extremely simple ingredient lists so you can be reasonably sure you're not going to be feeding your kid anything that kids haven't been consuming for millenia.
Should kids have it every day? No, probably not! They need to be used to drinking water as their fundamental beverage. "Fruity water" as a replacement for normal water simply inculcates them with the idea that plain water is gross and not good enough, and that they should demand some enhanced alternative. It does nothing to stem the habit-based dietary issues people end up with - after all, if you're used to fruity water and the only available options are juiceboxes and water, there's no way you'll be satisfied with the latter.
Increasingly it looks like there's a push to serve our kids things even less organic than we used to. Beyond Meat or maggot burgers, fruity water, it's like there's a war on normal, real products. Why are we assuming these new untested alternatives are somehow better or, at least, not fraught with most of the failure modes of their predecessors?
> not obvious whether to serialize that subfield as an attribute or as a child.
Attributes are just strings, generally for metadata. I'd probably serialize an object from another language more verbosely. This is where an important distinction needs to be made: the XML format you use for config files or for data exchange from your app to others should not necessarily be just a serialized object from the most convenient form inside your application. If you care about the operators of the app, you'll allow them a more concise format for that kind of thing, and use XSD or your own internal mechanisms to turn that into an object you want to actually work with.
It's the sort of problem people have once, abstract away, and move on from.
Aren't we just reinventing the wheel, though? Got your structured data format, now you need parsers (tons available for XML, incl SAX, DOM parsers, SimpleXML, Nokogiri...) a schema and validation tools (XSD), a templating mechanism (XSLT), a query language (XPath), ...
JSON was a reaction to the verbosity of XML, but a better reaction would have been to work harder on our text editors so that working with XML would be just as easy as working with JSON in terms of the numbers of keystrokes needed. Better parser interfaces that help you treat the dataformat more like it's part of the language would also help (i.e. SAX and DOMDocument suck to work with, but SimpleXML is almost idiomatic).
Agreed. There's tons of employment for people that can work with microcontrollers, FPGAs, ASICs, bespoke control hardware, etc. which are often harder to get into than traditional software engineering.
Not a chance. Consider that we have working quantum annealers (the D-Wave machines), but they cost ~20 million dollars; and there are no real working gate model machines beyond a few qubits that don't seem to be particularly useful (i.e. nobody's done anything meaningful with them).
The best bet you have for now if you're interested in quantum computing is to check out D-Wave Leap https://www.dwavesys.com/take-leap and see if you can make an annealer do something useful via their cloud service. If you're solving tough optimization problems it's apparently useful.
Lame. Is there any real reason to do this? Does the code take a lot of maintenance, aimed as it is against a protocol from 1971? Is there a reason to cut people off from easy interoperability with links on the older parts of the web, many of which surprisingly do still work?
FTP sucks, sure, we get it. No reason to use it now. Still, Google seems to have a mission of deprecating the old Web, from their search results that push that kind of content down, to their browser deprecations of FTP and Flash and Java applets. How is one supposed to even see the old parts of the web anymore?
> It's time for real world identity linked accounts for participating in online conversations.
You might be able to implement this in a small, affluent European country, but nowhere else. Consider the fact that in the USA, it is a standard talking point of the left that the right's continual push to ask for ID to _vote_ has been branded as a racist policy; it seems that we're simply to accept that large swathes of people will simply not have any ID, whether they're legally present in the country or not.
How do you suggest solving that problem, so as to have some actual decent ID on file with which to back the online ID upon?
And, once you've solved that, how are you going to scale it to impoverished countries that barely have the infrastructure to have any internet access at all, never mind vetting everyone's access to it?
Once you have this ID system, how are you going to mandate that all websites validate access against it? Enforce it at the ISP level? How are people going to offer wifi in coffee shops, etc? Force everything through a big proxy? The scale and expense of the infrastructure involved in doing this is immense. Government IT efforts seem to fail more often than not these days - witness the failures to improve the IRS, or the recent Canadian government payroll system implementation scandal with IBM.
> Second, it reduces the need for online censorship beyond what is required by law.
In America, you have absolute freedom of speech, save of course for speech that is treasonous (i.e. divulging classified information). There is no requirement to censor by law. If someone wants to issue speech you consider hateful, it is not illegal for them to do so. This is not true many other places, and unfortunately may change in the USA at some point in our lifetimes ending one of the greatest freedoms that anyone has ever possessed out of our fear that somehow freedom is going to be what leads to our oppression, and not the giving of too much power to the state. Ironic; even more ironic that the left is the group most siding with big corporations to push this narrative. Never thought I'd see that; not after Occupy Wall Street, but that spirit is thoroughly dead.
> So much of the hateful garbage posted online is only posted in the first place because of anonymity. Remove that, we probably don't get that posting in the first place so we can avoid the messy issue of enforced top down censorship.
Right, because self-imposed censorship where we all go through the day with a fake smile on our faces, only saying the right things, like as though the things we feel safe saying on LinkedIn is sufficient to cover all legitimate human dialogue. Say the wrong thing and disappear into a Kafka-esque nightmare, where you can never get the complete list of all the things you can't say because such a list would be even more dangerous than what you were planning to say in the first place...
No, friend. You're wrong.
Anonymity and free speech are the incredible power to bring light to darkness. They're what enables us to be more than the sum of our parts; what lets those unfortunate in appearance have equal footing to those who are attractive, what lets those who are disabled keep up with athletes. It's what lets us find corruption and root it out more effectively than ever before, and it is this spirit of taking down evil people that is going to be crushed by ideas like yours, not the actual evils that lurk within the hearts of men.
I am at once awed by the level of work that goes into a really good typeface, and also astounded that this still seems to be a difficult sort of terrain that people are not just willing, but positively excited to summit. Why go to the trouble when your font is only going to be seen by a small number of people and used by even less? Are you really having any ideas that haven't been had already in plenty of other fonts? Will your extra 0.001% tweak to readability make life easier for 0.001% of people that read something written in it?
So the app should ask for a permission to a reasonable set of domains, and when you're installing it, you should get a clearly laid out permissions / privacy risk management worksheet to look at and agree to.
Of course you want that country. The thing is, the magical panacea of giving out free money to everyone just devalues the money. $1000 Yang Bucks will become the equivalent of $100 now within short order, as prices for things go up.
Real juice is just fine to drink - in moderation! Before getting some exercise, it's a great boost, has vitamins, easy energy, and it's an excellent bribe. It's also trivial to get juiceboxes that have extremely simple ingredient lists so you can be reasonably sure you're not going to be feeding your kid anything that kids haven't been consuming for millenia.
Should kids have it every day? No, probably not! They need to be used to drinking water as their fundamental beverage. "Fruity water" as a replacement for normal water simply inculcates them with the idea that plain water is gross and not good enough, and that they should demand some enhanced alternative. It does nothing to stem the habit-based dietary issues people end up with - after all, if you're used to fruity water and the only available options are juiceboxes and water, there's no way you'll be satisfied with the latter.
Increasingly it looks like there's a push to serve our kids things even less organic than we used to. Beyond Meat or maggot burgers, fruity water, it's like there's a war on normal, real products. Why are we assuming these new untested alternatives are somehow better or, at least, not fraught with most of the failure modes of their predecessors?