The stolen election thing is very dumb, but people forget the same argument was made in 2016 with Russia “hacking the election” with no evidence found.
I agree with the idea that someone who was convicted twice of sex crimes in a leadership role is a bad idea and that by including them you may be excluding others.
Although I am curious about your opinion about other senarios. What is the person was found guilty in a US college Title IX court? Or what if it was just an accusation online? These are the questions we should get clear answers to now so when they (inevitably) happen, we know how to act, we don't have a twitter debate war to decide.
If you are looking for in-person, I think it’s a numbers game. I would like to meet more people like this myself, but I have found a few just by meeting friends or friends that are engineers.
I realize Facebook isn’t very popular right now, but all I see usually is people talking about how bad Facebook is, while the browse their Instagram and talk on messenger.
Not saying you can’t hate the company for what it is, but seems like so many people are calling for the end of Facebook while being it’s most dedicated users.
Not saying this justifies anything, but at least the reasoning for the high false positive rate is simple.
Facebook gets a lot of bad PR for having lots of misinformation.
It makes sense from a business perspective to overcorrect, because general public is way more angry about potential misinformation than people having their normal posts taken down.
Again, not saying it’s justified, but having 1 major anti-vaccine post get through would be way worse for public image then 100 Christmas greetings being taken down and then corrected.
I definitely agree with this, but I think you will find very few people that do.
People in the middle-class want to believe it has more in common with the lower class.
Everyone thinks the person slightly richer then them is the one making money they don't need and lives the luxurious life, and everyone their income and lower are the ones with real struggles.
The middle-class (me included) might not like it, but they aren't the same as someone who struggles to make ends meet.
Clean code is specifically a book about how to write code well. This isn't criticizing writing clean code, but specifically what that book recommends programmers do.
I wouldn't say the mission of trying to create "clean" code is a bad one. Certainly there is terrible code to read and maintain, which implies there are good ways to write code.
I feel like saying "discussion is bad because it brings mediocre minds" to a discussion is a bit gatekeep-y. That applies to every discussion.
That being said though, I do agree somewhat with the premise that "democracy is great because anyone can vote, but it is terrible because anyone can vote."
It sucks when some field becomes political, because the attitude around it changes from "lets listen to the experts" to "it is my God-given right to have an opinion on it regardless if I understand the issue."
Small OS projects can be done in any language. Java has an OS built from it. Real Linux and systems projects can only be done with very low level languages.
Discord switched from Go to Rust because of slowness issues, I promise if its too slow for an app its too slow for OS.
If Go wants to be a very low level "systems everywhere" then get rid of the GC. Or alternatively stop ranking it above Rust and C++, when its apples to oranges.
I think the main point is that Go (while a very good language for lower level work) is presented as a better alternative to C++ or Rust because its "nicer" but a big reason it is nicer is the lack of memory management.
It's weird to crown Go as better when it is nicer simply by ignoring very low-level work then pretend that the argument of OS development is irrelevant.
A bit of an exaggeration, but its like saying HTML is a better "programming" language than javascript when creating documents, then ignore the fact HTML isn't actually programmable.