Well, everybody told them. Many times. And also pointed and laughed.

Where are my glasses?!?

Well, I guess if you ask the right translator, it may.

It’s a thing on most of the world. But it seems not to be a thing on a large part of the US.

Java requiring you to write every exception that can happen in your code isn’t helpful.

Explicit error types are great, but Java managed to make them on a way where you get almost none of the upside and is so full of downsides that indoctrinated a generation into thinking knowing your errors is bad.

The amount of people on the internet seriously complaining that both Rust error handling sucks and that .unwrap(); is too verbose is just staggering.

Even if you want it to be human readable, you don’t need to include the name into every field and use balanced separators.

Any CSV variant would be an improvement already.

Of all the games that I would expect to have a global ranking, that is the absolute last.

As they say… donate a kidney and you are a hero, donate three and somehow you are a monster.

About the title; my condolences.

The hell of one idea that just won’t die. It was created out of thin air by sheer force of racist speculation, and known to be wrong for close to a century. Yet people still keep repeating it.

Lots of "maybe"s, I see…

On which of those application types there are developers that write most of one of the halves, but do not touch the other half?

(Oh, yeah, on the phone apps, but only the ones that are a web site cached on the phone.)

The entire meme is about web-dev. That split between backend and frontend isn’t anywhere else. (And is stupid for the web too, but well, that’s what web-dev do.)

maybe that’s all the customer needs

The food truck is often better than the restaurant experience in every dimension… The same is valid for the app analogies.

How many people worked on it is not a dimension that counts.

It’s a nicer syntax for inline styles.

If you want to use inline styles everywhere, it’s great.

I guess some people write code, and some people also read and maintain it.

It was already around the peak of the US empire, yeah. You may be biased.

That excerpt does nothing even similar to claiming the definition makes things clear.

I have no idea what l is, but given the context of axiomatization of arithmetic, I’m almost sure the author picked a fair and precise example.

Yeah:

parseInt("a") -> NoT a NuMbEr

Israel has been claiming they are “a week away” from having the bomb for 30 years. They have been working on a bomb for 60 years, since the US worked with them to start their nuclear project.

Some 20 years ago they got in a situation where it would actually take a couple of months to make a bomb. They seem to have stopped there on purpose.

Is that the part that was confusing?