InstanceOf

8 lat temudiscuss

I've seen women call men creepy for literally no reason (this is more common in pre-college aged girls), I assume it's equivalent to "you're ugly and not a person to me and I'm offended you tried to talk to me (even if it was purely school assignment related)". I've even met one girl who _wanted_ it to be a term of endearment (considering the above, there was no way that was going to work). I've also seen a shit-ton of creepy borderline sociopathic behavior from males, much of it gone uncalled out (by the supposedly sane males who were standing by), which often will lead to a woman calling the person creepy (and hopefully she isn't physicslly hurt in addition to merely the scare of something terrible about to happen).

InstanceOf

9 lat temudiscuss

You're free to have an opinion about which economic system is better. But the opinion that communism implies genocide and capitalism implies freedom is quite non-negotiably uneducated.

Your link makes no effort to suggest that capitalism is a positive force in reducing poverty or that communism is a negative force. In fact, it seems more likely you'd draw the opposite conclusion:

> Second, we can also see from this chart that despite remarkable progress, in some rich countries—notably the United States—a fraction of the population still lives in extreme poverty. This is the result of exceptionally high income inequality

The best conclusion I can draw here is that Western powers are rich because they imperialized other nations effectively and survived key historical wars. Africa is doing bad because they were heavily colonized and met the bad end of several wars. Communist nations failed to reach US levels of power because they imperialized less effectively than the US. No where in history or that article do you see "they became communist then became more impoverished"

The article even goes forth to mention poverty traps, a problem well known to critics of capitalism. A problem that socialism reduces and communism eliminates.

Again, you're free to pick capitalism as your ideal economic model, but you should at least start with factual information on the alternatives.

InstanceOf

9 lat temudiscuss

> there were no poor people before capitalism

Definitely said nothing like that. In the US there are 6 unoccupied house for every homeless person. Somehow this is better because you found a way to decentralize the dictator and blame the victims?

InstanceOf

9 lat temudiscuss

Communism isn't genocidal. You should read up on what it actually is instead of relying on pro-capitalism propoganda. "Somebody died because Stalin/Mao" holds no candle compared to capitalism's "somebody died because housing, hospitalizing, and feeding the poor wasn't profitable".

InstanceOf

9 lat temudiscuss

Someone should make an optional IDE plugin or setting to convert them.

InstanceOf

9 lat temudiscuss

If you're making a 4 page brochure website, you can use react or rails. A beginner can handle that. If you're making a full web application where the user interface had good UX and is performant with non-trivial user interface logic and also there is non-trivial backend logic and eventually you would like to release mobile apps, I don't think you should expect to be able to teach a beginner all of that. But using react+express (I prefer feathersjs, but you can sustitute rails or any other backend) will be the shortest path to the more complicated scenario I mentioned.

Your comment is based on a grossly misleading presentation of the comparison though. React is a powerful view layer with an ecosystem around it. Rails is a full framework. You've misrepresented rails as simple and easy to learn by using only one term to describe it, and misrepresented the alternative to rails by separating it's components into named parts to scare us into thinking "Wow, 7 things? That's way more complicated than 2 things!" The reverse misrepresentation would be "So we now have react + postgre, but you're still using rails router + rails templates + rails graphql + rails rest + rails ORM + rails http client + jQuery + jQuery UI + gem + Ruby + macbookpro. How can you manage to train anyone on so many complicated tools?"

Why is this progress? Rails has it's limits in terms of full potential (complicsted backend + complicated UI + fast path to cross platform apps). You can add react to rails and reach the full potential. You can also do less than the full potential without react. React has some alternatives growing to also give you full potential, some not even in JS. It's 100% progress all across the board.

InstanceOf

9 lat temudiscuss

Vuejs can be configured to use pug.

comments