The original saying: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
I think an intellectually honest take is that it's advantageous and prudent to depend on allies and neighbors; leveraging each party's strengths for efficiencies over strategic autonomy. This trade-off is commonly debated with depending on US military hardware in favor of EU military hardware (e.g. France's long standing position for EU strategic autonomy), or vendor lock-in with AWS vs cloud-independent offerings.
The problem is when an ally becomes inconsistent and/or uncooperative; a high stakes version of prisoner's dilemma. At which point do you replace an ally's offerings with more expensive, and often inferior, alternatives? The general populace rarely has the appetite for the short-term economic pain required to achieve long-term strategic independence.
Rust has clearly opined that they prefer a small standard library and a "choose your own libraries" vs "batteries included" approach.
If Rust included a crypto lib and a vulnerability was discovered, many fixes are backwards incompatible. Rust maintains strict backwards compatibility, which means updating the relevant crypto functions in the std lib would necessitate a major version bump. By keeping crypto outside of std, it allows the community to make backwards incompatible changes at a higher pace.
Python handles backward incompatibility changes via multi-year deprecations. I'm not familiar with Golang but a quick Google search reveals that it deals with this by using feature flags via GODEBUG. Excessive feature flag use is a bad pattern in my experience years ago, but I don't know if that's applicable here.
I prefer the trade-offs of a "choose your own lib" approach, but I understand the advantages and preferences of those who prefer a "batteries included" approach.
There are a few flashlights that have USB PD power bank functionality and also run on 18650 or 21700 rechargeable, replaceable Li-ion cells. I bought a Loop Gear SK05 Pro to replace Anker power banks for this use case.
As a hiring manager that visited every resume Github link because of my FOSS background, >99% of them had nothing of substance (no activity, school projects, etc).
Eh, us-east-1 is the oldest AWS region and if you get some AWS old timers talking over some beers they'll point out the legacy SPOFs that still exist in us-east-1.
Chrome launched in an era where IE didn't stop the gazillion pop ups and crashed pretty often losing dozens of windows, before tabbed browsing and with no restore. Firefox was a resource hog due to memory fragmentation.
Google was also the company that espoused, "Do no evil" and contributed a bunch to open source. A lot has changed since then.
— George Bush, 2002
The original saying: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
I think an intellectually honest take is that it's advantageous and prudent to depend on allies and neighbors; leveraging each party's strengths for efficiencies over strategic autonomy. This trade-off is commonly debated with depending on US military hardware in favor of EU military hardware (e.g. France's long standing position for EU strategic autonomy), or vendor lock-in with AWS vs cloud-independent offerings.
The problem is when an ally becomes inconsistent and/or uncooperative; a high stakes version of prisoner's dilemma. At which point do you replace an ally's offerings with more expensive, and often inferior, alternatives? The general populace rarely has the appetite for the short-term economic pain required to achieve long-term strategic independence.