Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | CWIZO's commentslogin

Good. We do not need to bring even more animal suffering into this world. Especially when we have much better alternatives available to us.


I love how google (youtube) starts immediately showing me ads in the language of whatever country I happen to be on holiday at the time. For that country specific services/products. As if they don't know exactly where I'm from and which languages I speak. Absolutely baffling that they get this so badly wrong.


That doesn't seem very practical. The issue is that imgur links are everywhere and you wouldn't want to switch browsers whenever you encounter one. Not to mention it requires per device setup. Author's solution is much better than what you describe.


Prime example: animal agriculture. By far the biggest driver of biodiversity loss and nature destruction. Yet people justify it constantly with trivial things like taste, convinience, tradition, etc.


Perhaps also being uninformed? I personally don't know why loss of biodiversity would be bad. Is that common knowledge?


It looks like we will be forever looking for solutions when we keep on ignoring animal farming in these conversations. Not even a single mention of the orders of magnitude more of water that is required for animal agriculture vs just growing plants directly for human consumption.

Would it solve everything? No. But it would solve a whole lot and the fact that someone that specialises in environmentalism doesn't even mention it shows just how far we are from solving this.


I don't get it. Cattle eat grass. Grass is extraordinarily efficient at using water. It's what would normally be growing there without humans!

70% of the UK is farmland and I'm willing to bet much of that is non-irrigated pasture.


> It's what would normally be growing there without humans!

A lot of it (most of it, likely) would be forest.


No it would not unless you also removed all grazing animals.


Evolution doesn't work over a span of few generations. If humans are evolving to adapt to the modern weetern diet then we won't see that for a very very very long time.

You're just cherry picking examples while ignoring a mountain of literature that shows exactly the opposite of what you're saying.


> evolution doesn't work over a span of a few generations.

Yes it can

> Over the past two decades, it has become clear that evolutionary change can be fast enough to be observed in present-day populations (Hendry and Kinnison 1999; Kinnison and Hendry 2001; Hendry et al. 2008; Gingerich 2009) and that it can directly affect the dynamics of populations and communities (Hairston et al. 2005; Saccheri and Hanski 2006; Kinnison and Hairston 2007; Pelletier et al. 2009). Much recent interest has focused on the possibility that so-called rapid or contemporary evolution leads to ‘evolutionary rescue’, whereby threatened populations avoid extinction by adapting to an altered environment (Barrett and Hendry 2012; Gonzalez et al. 2013).

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3894905/


It'd be surprising if that applies in this context. In the case of the individuals OP mentions, their parents would not have been exposed to ultra processed food (or barely, perhaps only after they've reproduced), so ehatever gens they passed on would not have been adapted. There's simply not enough generations in this case. Especially not for such significant changes.

In any case, it's moot as by and large the westeren diet is not good for the population, exceptions are simply that.


My great grandparents in the US were eating diets of ultra processed foods. Soda Shopes, hot dogs, sausages, hamburgers, Spam, boxed spaghetti, hamburger helper, Jello molds with canned fruit in them, etc.

My great grandfather in particular used to smoke a box of King Edward cigars a week, and lived mostly on a diet of plain bologna sandwiches on plain white bread, and candy corn.


Ine big thing for me is the removal of the reactions & mentions sidebar.

I now have to constantly manually check in a special tab to see if someone ACKed my message.


That's moved to activity -> mentions, I think.


> Coming from this direction, the addition of commas feels like an evil plan to have more syntax errors, with no obvious benefit

It helps to learn your history before you criticise something and claim it is useless.

JSON is the way it is mainly because it is just JavaScript and that meant that every browser in the world already supported it before JSON was even invented. It is THE reason why it is as popular as it is.


It was just a matter of:

    var myObject = eval(httpResponseBody)

Of course, this is vulnerable to all kinds of issues so we got JSON parser, and later JSON became part of the Web API.


I remember the infinite loops stuffed into JSON results to prevent this sort of thing.


If it is "just JavaScript", why the lack of comments ?


Comments were intentionally excluded to prevent the use of parsing directives.

(Sadly, Crockford's post about this reasoning was on Google Plus and is no longer online.)


{comment : "your comments here!"}

{copyright comment : "JSON doesn't require/enforce specific comments is a good thing" }

{comments : "JSON parser is not an 'comment' editor! }

Don't know whtat the google plus article covered, but Crockfor's comments : https://www.linkedin.com/posts/douglas-crockford-724600109_j...


I think the spirit is forbidding creative developers from using the comments to include active content. I know people who if struggling with datetime encoding, would add a "// DATEFMT: YYYY-D-M" comment and be on their merry way, making it incompatible with all other JSON parsers.


What might be nice is to add a prefix to key name that indicates 'this is a 'internal document reference', skip this unless quests to parser to not ignore. Would allow for describing encoding method(s) used. date format comments being very helpful. Technically, can do by just dropping by key name.

Why comment on a format vs. adding an associated "key""format" with format information. aka date : 25.02.04 date-fmt : YY.DD.MM


Jokingly, why does Javascript have the semi-colon “;”


I really with the semicolon weren't optional. Its "I'll take my best guess" parsing is maddening.

One that keeps killing me is:

    return
        (complicated-multi-line-computation)
Since it can put a semicolon at the end of the first line, it does. Which means the return value is undefined, and the rest of it is just some code that it never actually reaches. A linter will fix that, but I find the usual fix a bit ugly:

    return (
        (complicated multi line computation)
    )


There are a few minor, uncommon edge cases, probably only encountered by minimisers, where automatic semicolon insertion may cause unintentional behaviour, so semicolons are required. One of the specs; https://262.ecma-international.org/7.0/#sec-rules-of-automat... (link from an earlier comment of like) spells it out in detail.


While these edge cases are fairly rare in everyday JS codebases, Typescript adds some, e.g. inline type casts for function calls:

    const foo = someFn()
    (foo as Bar).doSomething()


The author knows that. Fourth paragraph.


If the author knows that, why even bother with writing a whole "what should have been" article? It could not have been any oher way.


Yet another example/demo of "Use the source!"

There is nothing in the JSON spec that prohibits pre/post non-json parsing search / replace 'end of line' marker with one or more commas.

JSON spec just tells one what the JSON parser expects, not what the end user needs/wants. (GPT-JSON not withstanding)


> > ... feels like an evil plan to have more syntax errors, with no obvious benefit

> ... before you criticise something and claim it is useless.

These 2 statements feel quite far apart.


Relying on the inherent JavaScript compatibility hack has caused as many problems as it has solved. Plus, the additional of trailing commas made a mess of things once more, forcing developers to let go of the direct compatibility with many versions of JavaScript engines and redirecting them to specialised JSON APIs instead.

The easy solution would be to go the JavaScript route and make commas optional, like JavaScript does with semicolons. You could even introduce vague and easily forgotten rules about commas being inserted between oneliner dictionaries.

I think the question "why" is easily answered, but "why should it still" is more difficult.


Making things optional means you'd end up with the csv standard mess on json, let's not!


The easy solution is horrible solution. Pretty much all the projects set semicolons as mandatory for a reason.


Great idea. However, the clip I got was spoken so fast that if I was able to actually understand any of it I think I wouldn't be learning Spanish as I'd have already mastered it.

Is there a beginner mode?


you could change the video speed, would be cool if he added a button to do it


If you put the knob in a different parts studio then you'd probably have a lot less lag.


will give that a try next time, thank you!


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: