Ditto, enjoy the catharsis. Good advice to not take it personally, I'll try to give a less aggressive point of view. All of this has come to mind [but not repeated out of kindness or laziness, whichever].
So, to start: someone wants me to install Postman/similar and pay real money to share and make a request? Absolutely not. I can read the spec from Swagger, or whatever, too... and write down what was useful [for others]. We all have cURL or some version of Python.
Surely a few phrases of text worth making plans to save, and paying for [at least twice, you to research and them to store], are worth putting into source control. It's free, even gifts dividends. How? Automation that works faster than a human pushing a button. Or creates more buttons!
Commenters here are experts in react and have interests in technology, or are looking to understand more about these topics. No one reading here is an expert on geopolitical issues. You're just connecting on the wrong post, and probably the wrong website, if you want to talk about these things. There are places for that, but it's not here this comment section and if you keep trying to make it that you're just going to get down voted over and over.
But who has become the defacto steward of React over the last 5 years? Vercel.
Whose CEO has made a lot of news recently for their political views? Guillermo
What front-end framework library now needs to distance itself from Vercel as it's main steward? React.
IT'S ALL POLITICS. That's the entire point of the foundation. That's what this whole discussion is about.
> No one reading here is an expert on geopolitical issues. You're just connecting on the wrong post, and probably the wrong website, if you want to talk about these things
I don't know, I see a lot of posts and threads here of people discussing geo-political issues. Not just for the sake of it of course, but because politics is everywhere and affects everything, because technology is always going to have some form of politics attached, and because everyone is a political actor in their lives.
Separating fully any technology news and political happenstance is impossible. Now of course it doesn't mean every topic should devolve into identity politics, but having discussion about how and why things are they way they are is inherently political.
> each of which individually must be an improvement over the status quo
I agree. And looking at the average web user specifically, is "owning your own data" enough of a UX improvement? Maybe paired with less ads and products that optimize for the end-user rather than advertisers? I think... maybe. I hope so. It's going to take a lot of work done for little money, which is concerning, but I'm optimistic.
I was thinking something very similar as I read the letter and hear people talk about luck in a similar way. I think attributing things to luck, while seemingly humble, can be dismissive and/or simplistic. Yes, we're all lucky to be in our situations -- living in this time, fed, privileged. Though, whether this luck is experienced positively or not is entirely subjective. Also, to ascribe our given situation to luck dismisses the concerted efforts of all living things of this time and past that have guided us to our current situation -- once again, without qualifying it as good or bad. It is almost disabling in it's message. The flip side is that many things happened that were dreamed, planned, intended, and carried out to land us in our situation. This to me feels more empowering, hopeful, appreciative, and also responsible than casting off as merely luck.
I was searching for what to answer people who attribute everything I’ve done to luck. There’s the classic “It’s strange because the more I work the more I’m lucky”, but that’s very condescending. Thank you for offering me a positive alternative. In a sense it makes me owe work to my society.
If you accept that the world is not "just" (just-world-fallacy), then you will also believe that rewards are indeterministic. It follows that rewards are attributed to luck, while effort and results are (by definition) not.
There is no accusation of dishonesty in this argument, and no need to feel accused of scamming.
(One point is that people who persist longer, receive more awards because the "area" under their luck-curve is larger. And people who have lots bad luck in the beginning get discouraged and stop trying ...)
