There are plenty of sharp edges in JavaScript to cut yourself on. For that reason I'd argue it isn't easy.
Compare it to something like C# where you could start pushing out code on day one. It might not be pretty or the most efficient code but there won't be any surprises, it will do what you expect.
I love the language - it is earning me a comfortable income and I am very productive in it, but it requires experience and iron code discipline not to let it bite you!
Well, then I strongly disagree. Modern JS is very easy to write, but extremely complex because of all the leftover cruft. For example, a beginner can declare a varible with let, const, var or (what could be easier) nothing at all. The resulting scoping rules, however, are anything but simple.
I don't think it's complex at all. The scoping rules are very simple. Block scoping just added another piece.
The difficulty is that there are many simple things like this to learn and to combine in a safe and maintainable manner for anything other than trivial programs. Out of the box, the language does nothing to discourage bad coding practices (some might say it even encourages them). It's the flip-side of being such an accessible language.
It is possible write JS in a way that avoids a lot of the complexity, but it requires experience and discipline and some tooling, just to be sure. The code will look simple but it is not an easy thing to do.
A note slightly related: Mars reaches perihelic opposition with the sun on July 27, 2018, which means observers on Earth will have their closest view of the planet since 2003. Great time to borrow a telescope.
I've seen Brutalist design being mentioned a few times here and it always shows this website gallery, I am no specialist, so I wonder, is this what brutalist design really is?
Quick Google search explains that brutalist architecture is about creating modular elements representing specific functionality often sacrificing aesthetics.
A lot of the sites on that gallery are ugly just for being ugly, they have no functionality and use different types of animations or constructs to just make something unconventional from common website aesthetics, I get why, but it feels like the word brutalist was borrowed here and is applied in a very different way.
Brutalism is features before design. A cement tower block is an example in architecture. http://skimfeed.com is an example of a website that follows brutalist ideals. Early craigslist and early search engines are good examples too.
I agree and this is what I consider to be brutalist web design, but that site(the top search result for 'brutalist websites', 'brutalist design', 'brutalist web' and so on) has a bunch of weird designs(such as http://www.xtragear.services/ ), which is the source of my confusion.
These look like they were made by a Starbucks barista with a graphic design “degree” and 100k in debt. In other words, ugly and pretentious. Yeah I know, I don’t get it.
Googlers must ask to use Windows because “Windows is harder because it has 'special' security problems so it requires high-level permission before someone can use it.” In addition, “Windows tools tend to be heavy and inflexible.”
You can still use an Android phone without the Google Play store if you use a custom rom such as LineageOS. I do not not have a Google account set on my Motorola E LTE.
Haha, good one. I have an Android device since last year (a dumb phone before then), so I am guilty of that one. I try to restrict use as much as possible (I have no Google account). I'll maybe try to install a Lineage OS on it, if that's possible (but afaik that's still Android so there's that).
Privacy wise, I am not sure if an IDevice would be such a bad decision. But afaik they're phoning home still and I have to trust them...
Windows 10 is the best OS in the family so far. The fact that you switched, is most likely just a hyped-overreaction to one of the things that they did that you didn't like.
It depends on your definition of "best". I agree with you from a technical point of view but this is not my sole decision criterion.
I had setup an Active Directory server on a Raspberry Pi for serving my Windows 7 clients. I would have loved to continue using Windows as I think it is great technology. However I was switching because of some crucial decisions by Microsoft:
1. Shoving unwanted "features" along with security updates. As much as I understand Microsoft in wanting a more uniform landscape this is a no-go for me. The only reason I was not hit by the Windows 10 mandatory upgrade was the fact I had the machines in an AD domain (or at least I suspect so).
2. Phoning home without any recourse for me to even know what is collected. How long it is stored. Remember: innocent data today could bring me in trouble tomorrow. Collection can change any time without me even noticing.
It's not necessarily a hyped overreaction if those things matter to the people switching. Some people actually care about those things that have changed enough to switch to a different OS that doesn't have those issues.
If you have a valid business reason for it, it's no big deal. Ie: I work with electronics EDA tools and the ones we use only work on Windows, so I have a laptop with Win 10 on it, but my daily driver is a Thinkpad with Linux.
