Not really. SF already spends more than $250 million annually on programs for the homeless[0]. That's about $33,333 per homeless (7,499[1]). And yet, the problem is worse than ever.
This. Thank you. I'm being rate limited, so this is the only post I'll be making on this thread. My question was genuine. I want to learn both the positives and the pitfalls of dependent types. I mimicked the book's description because it amused me from a linguistic perspective. Looking back, I probably should have phrased it differently.
> why do folks completely avoid a language for a single relatively bland syntactic feature?
Personal preference isn't a good enough reason?
I don't like white space sensitive languages because I've seen what happens in python when somebody accidentally adds a couple of lines formatted with spaces into a file formatted with tabs. I've seen git and svn mangle tabs. Long blocks are harder to track. Refactoring functions and nested ifs are much harder to keep track of. If you somehow lose all of the formatting in a block or a file, it's much more difficult to recreate the code if the only block delimiters are whitespace.
Essentially, white space delimiters are just one more thing that can go wrong and ruin my day. I try to keep those to a minimum. That said, Nim is my new go to for short scripts. I wouldn't write anything large in it for the reasons mentioned above.
I think OOP specifically derailed programming because of how big it was, how fast it took over and how long it was considered to be the one true programming paradigm. When OOP hit, it hit hard and fast. It wasn't long before colleges were teaching OOP as The One True Way To Program. Every employer required knowledge of OOP before they would interview you. And I mean every employer, from startups to corporate enterprise. And once it took hold, it took people (and me!) 10-20 years to realize the OOP emperor had no clothes on.
I still don't understand why or how it got so big so quickly. All I can figure is that the software industry as a whole pays attention to the wrong people.
Here's an insight from a developer with 15+ years of experience: be very, very careful who you take advice from. The so called "best and brightest" in our industry have led us down the path we're at today. I have a supercomputer in my pocket compared to computing speeds in 2000, but it can't even smoothly scroll down a webpage. Object Oriented programming alone has derailed progress in computing by at least 20 years.
They increased it last year from 32GB to 50GB a month. Frankly, I think even a 50GB cap on an "unlimited" plan should be illegal, but it's better than most carriers.
The world isn't fucked up. The world operates the way it operates. It's your expectations that are fucked up.
Human beings love resources (money), power and control. Anything that gives them that can and will be exploited. Approach the world with that in mind and you can anticipate the vast majority of these issues. Game designers do this all the time without worrying about being "cynical".
> [federation] seems to map more cleanly onto the real world, putting the ownership and costs and responsibilities on those who control the hardware.
This is both the biggest strength of federation and its biggest weakness. How do those who control the hardware profit from federating open and free services? Federation will be a contender when (if?) somebody figures that out.
Do you know anybody who commutes by plane? It's an interesting notion, but something tells me it's too expensive of a commute, even for Bay Area salaries.