My emphasis is on the word "risk" (captured in the literal words "most likely"). It's risky to go without a guide, though it's not "needed" in the sense of a 100% failure rate.
Honestly, the fact that you assumed others were talking about "have a guide or 100% failure" is disingenuous on your part.
The point is they do something, but for that something to be most likely good/positive, you also need therapy, which if you want, you can interpret as a "trip sitter" or whatever the phrase is.
Yeah the folks who are up in arms about Facebook can't really argue with the incredible utility of finally having everyone on a single platform. It's so easy to schedule things!
I quit Facebook for a few years, it didn't do anything to my life one way or another, except maybe put me in a group of people others had to reach out "out of band" to invite to things, which practically meant I had to hear about events second hand or not go to things.
The emotional vitriol inspired by social media is completely unfounded. You can make it whatever experience you want; people just like to complain.
This article should be titled, "I don't know how to use social media so I gave up on it."
The point of the quote is to demonstrate that using poor-folk calculations to try and figure out what things cost for rich folk is pointless, and has been for the past ~100 years.
You seem to believe there is only one way of happily living, and thank goodness it's the way you were raised!
How entirely fortunate for you and now your children, and fie on those who might believe there is some way to incorporate the last 30+ years of technology into raising happy children.
I genuinely feel bad for your kids, because they're not going to get the kind of upbringing they could have had where a healthy relationship with the actual world is fostered and encouraged. Instead they're stuck living in this pretend universe where computers are evil and responsible management of their time and attention is taken care of for them.
Great, and now your kid isn't going to be as well versed as their peers in the technology that drives literally everything. They'll be left behind as the kids who were allowed to grow/learn using modern tools fly past them.
You can't win. Everyone damages their children, stop pretending like you're some kind of exception.
Additionally, this nostalgic "My childhood was great these kids don't get what I had" is bullshit. The options available to children today to grow, explore, learn and interact with others has exploded. We did "ruin" your childhood, and made it immensely better.
Trying to give your child the childhood you had is abuse via neglect, at this point.
I don't think someone nitpicking between the definition of the words "framework" and "library" is engaging in this conversation honestly, and I'm pretty sure that your failure to address the "this is but one of hundreds of examples, not all of which are covered by standard libraries in PHP" comment I made is further justification of that belief.
I'm sorry if you thought I meant CSS rendering was the source of potential vulnerabilities, but for any website that has, say, users, if you're not using any PHP frameworks or external libraries you might have to implement some crypto of your own to store passwords securely, just for starters. I don't think PHP offers a standard library to do that, does it?
There are a hundred examples that are specific to whatever app this guy built for the Healthcare company, not all of which are covered by the PHP standard library...
I believe him when he says it passed external/internal auditing, however I have a very hard time believing he's not either very very expensive or took a very very long time to get the app to the place he claims it is (the third option is that it does very little, which won't actually end up being a good thing once the client gets over the honeymoon phase of "it's so much prettier!!!").
Further, the expertise I do bring to this conversation is in software development, and I can say assuredly that a one-man development team using no 3rd party libraries is definitely creating a codebase nigh unmaintainable by other people down the line. His bragging about creating job security for 2 years is honestly an understatement; he's got job security for the life of the products he's creating, as he's likely the only person who can do anything more with the website in a time frame that isn't measured in years.
But am I not right to have red flags fly when someone says they built a home-baked web service for managing health care information? Isn't that nuts, from a security perspective?
I'm super glad to hear that happened, but please understand where I'm coming from when I said what I did; reinventing the wheel (as I'm sure you had to here) is straight up dangerous.
A tale as old as the Internet (older!) is people arguing about how we represent our morality through legal code.
The First Amendment is a law, but it's an imperfect representation of an idea, and that idea is that everyone has a right to (among other things) express ideas free from organized oppression. A lot of people see "organized oppression" to be exclusively possible by a governing body, but some others see that to mean the platforms themselves.
"The First Amendment" is oftentimes used as a conversational shortcut to talk about the moral right of expression. Is it entirely accurate? No, and accuracy matters. However, the conversation doesn't die when the correction is made. Here, it's true that CloudFlare isn't in violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution, however the argument being made is that they have a moral obligation to stay a "dumb pipe", to prevent the oppression of a minority voice.
I'm not making that argument, I just wanted to point out the nuance of invoking "The First Amendment" here, that it's often not literally a reference to the legal authority of the private entity in question.
You realize the site redesign isn't why Digg failed, right? At least not the literal UI part, anyway.
They formalized power users by giving them outsized control of content, and that is what drove people off the platform, not because the site was less pretty...
Honestly, the fact that you assumed others were talking about "have a guide or 100% failure" is disingenuous on your part.