As another Faraday employee, I'll add that we didn't start right away with deployment. Instead, we used docker to provide a consistent way to test our apps. Once all of our apps were properly dockerized to run tests, we were able to move to deploying the app with a simple docker-machine + docker-compose setup. After that, it was a relatively easy move to ECS. docker-compose can probably handle 80% of your development needs, but the tool we wrote allowed us to quickly switch our apps from a canonical "image mode" to "source mode" while developing. It also provided a way to run acceptance tests locally with our entire app cluster running locally. A little more info: https://dkastner.github.io/2015/07/25/accidental-continuous-...
A huge payoff that Rust provides vs Ruby or JavaScript is when writing development tools. It saves so much time and trouble to install a binary than to try and get someone to download the right version of Ruby, gem install, etc. Rust, while having its tax, is really great about telling you why your code won't compile and keeping you from footgunning yourself.
Trying to get ack or ag working properly on Windows is a bit of a pain. Now there’s an equivalent in Rust, rg, and I can get something that’s mostly superior to these others with `cargo install rg`. (OK, so I had to have installed Rust first. But I had done that.)
You always have to install something or it must exist first. Node, FCC, clang, Ruby, Python... you just need to think of rustup as the the equivalent of getting you rust compiler environment setup.
While it's true there are more sources of plastic other than fossil fuels, the big disadvantage is the extra amount of energy and water needed. I doubt we'll be able to scale alternative plastics to match the levels produced from fossil fuels. But I do think we can get a lot of plastic from simply recycling it (maybe dig it back up from landfills). We can also reduce a lot of plastic demand by using reusable containers for things like groceries.
Automated sorting tech is becoming practical in more scenarios now as well, which should improve yields on recycled plastic. Traditional human-based sorting into bins by type of plastic often produces poor-quality output that has to be "downcycled" (e.g. into park benches, not a new coke bottle), because the percentage of mis-sorted impurities is too high.
Not only is it made from the lowest-grade oil, but this low grade oil constitutes the majority of all the oil (and near-oil substances) that's left, e.g. tar sands, oil shale.
The $1000 question is what the downside of the curve will look like. Will it be a sharp drop-off or a long plateau and decline? It's looking more like the latter at the moment.
I've been using a very similar tool, browserify to do the same thing. The great thing about browserify is it already comes with core node.js library support, as well as an http module wrapper.
With tools like this, I love being able to modularize my client-side code using CommonJS modules and running JS test from the command line using tools like Vows and Buster.js. I also love being able to declare dependencies on npm modules. It's just as easy as testing and writing Ruby code with rubygems and rspec.
The only issue that still bothers me is that nearly every DOM querying/manipulating library out there assumes there's a global window or document object. This means I have to stub it out in any CLI tests I run and then make sure jquery or whatever is referencing a virtual window I create with jsdom instead of the global stub.
although onejs and browserify tries to accomplish similar tasks, onejs has some noticeable implementation and concept differences (e.g browserify pollutes global scope a lot and it expects you to provide it a main module instead of a package manifest)
here is the output comparison of onejs and browserify:
The second thing is, onejs lets us use the core NodeJS library, too. It doesn't contain it by default but you can install the available modules by typing; "one install assert path util url"
