Assuming all of the assumptions in that article come to pass, why ignore Elixir/Erlang as a viable option for language & infrastructure?
Programming in the Apocalypse
121–130 of 301 posts
Re: Programming in the Apocalypse
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's true until people are suddenly hungry odr thirsty. Hunger or thrist will force them to act. And not necesserily nicely.
Exactly, mindless distraction is only an option when you are comfortable. Try not eating for a day + turning off your heating/cooling and see how interesting Twitter is then.
Mindless distraction is exactly what you turn to when your efforts to better your life become too monumental to bear: lifespans shorten because destitution drives people to apathy or an open desire for suicide.
Re: Programming in the Apocalypse
#123The pandemic taught me a lot about apocalypse. While people are a lot slower to buy into collective action and changing their way of life than I thought, society is far more robust than I expected. Covid looked nothing like a pandemic film, thank god. With that in mind, I have some ideas on what programming will look like in 30 years: 1. New frameworks and abstractions for making apps even more disposable while maint…
> The pandemic taught me a lot about apocalypse. I don't think it has taught you much. All things considered, despite all the suffering by unlucky individuals, when you consider humanity as a whole, covid is an insignificant blip. If it's significant at all, it's only because of our response to it. > Covid looked nothing like a pandemic film, thank god. Covid was not 1% as bad as any pandemic featured in a film. Huma…
What COVID taught me is that the human ability to not give a fuck is apparently infinite. I have trouble processing the fact that a million people died (in the USA) and there is no mourning, no shared sense of tragedy or loss, no looking more kindly on other people, just a madder, faster dash on cash and even more finger-pointing.
> Covid was not 1% as bad as any pandemic featured in a film.
I'll be generous and not dwell on this stunning example of this age's inability to get bothered by anything unless it hits harder than film. Look on the bright side I guess, despite how soulless, empty, and glib we have to be do so!
Re: Programming in the Apocalypse
#124The pandemic taught me a lot about apocalypse. While people are a lot slower to buy into collective action and changing their way of life than I thought, society is far more robust than I expected. Covid looked nothing like a pandemic film, thank god. With that in mind, I have some ideas on what programming will look like in 30 years: 1. New frameworks and abstractions for making apps even more disposable while maint…
> Covid looked nothing like a pandemic film, thank god. That's probably because it was not that great impact wise. If it was more like the Spanish Flu, with a huge death toll across all ages (as opposed to 1/10th the death toll, and mostly focused on older people and co-morbidities) it would have absolutely have looked like "a pandemic film".
I think there's a fallacy here in that "because covid's impact wasn't great, covid wasn't that bad." Any time we have to mobilize a lot of effort to head off the worst outcome, there's a tendency to say "well nothing really bad happened, so why did we go through all that effort?" Let's not trivialize the global effort necessary to bring us to 1/10th the death toll. It absolutely could've been worse.
It's our response to covid, not covid itself, that taught me a lot of what we're capable of in global crisis. We've come a long way since Spanish Flu.
Re: Programming in the Apocalypse
#125The pandemic taught me a lot about apocalypse. While people are a lot slower to buy into collective action and changing their way of life than I thought, society is far more robust than I expected. Covid looked nothing like a pandemic film, thank god. With that in mind, I have some ideas on what programming will look like in 30 years: 1. New frameworks and abstractions for making apps even more disposable while maint…
> The pandemic taught me a lot about apocalypse. I don't think it has taught you much. All things considered, despite all the suffering by unlucky individuals, when you consider humanity as a whole, covid is an insignificant blip. If it's significant at all, it's only because of our response to it. > Covid looked nothing like a pandemic film, thank god. Covid was not 1% as bad as any pandemic featured in a film. Huma…
I'd argue the opposite. If it's insignificant at all, it's only because of our response to it. Lots of people worked very, very hard for us to sit here typing "it wasn't that bad" unless you believe that our global covid response did very little to change the outcome. If you do believe that, though, there's probably little point in continuing this thread.
Re: Programming in the Apocalypse
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Covid looked nothing like a pandemic film, thank god. That's probably because it was not that great impact wise. If it was more like the Spanish Flu, with a huge death toll across all ages (as opposed to 1/10th the death toll, and mostly focused on older people and co-morbidities) it would have absolutely have looked like "a pandemic film".
I think there's a fallacy here in that "because covid's impact wasn't great, covid wasn't that bad." Any time we have to mobilize a lot of effort to head off the worst outcome, there's a tendency to say "well nothing really bad happened, so why did we go through all that effort?" Let's not trivialize the global effort necessary to bring us to 1/10th the death toll. It absolutely could've been worse. It's our response…
Well said. I think if the vaccines hadn't come out at all, it could well have been as bad as the Spanish Flu.
Re: Programming in the Apocalypse
#127I agree that we need to plan for climate adaptation (preparing for predictable problems) and resilience (preparing for unpredictable problems), but I have a few kneejerk responses: - Although it's looking increasingly unlikely that we can avert climate disaster, we can never give up. For example, 8 degrees of warming would be much worse than 4 degrees of warming, and could mean the difference between human extinction…
> human extinction and the mere collapse of our civilization How do you imagine human extinction being an outcome? It seems to me that the worst case scenario is large loss of population which would decrease greenhouse gas output. There would still be some increase in temperature even once we stop emitting, but wouldn't people in colder climates still survive?
Even if it doesn't directly cause extinction, it could do things like destabilise nuclear powers.
Re: Programming in the Apocalypse
#128I agree that we need to plan for climate adaptation (preparing for predictable problems) and resilience (preparing for unpredictable problems), but I have a few kneejerk responses: - Although it's looking increasingly unlikely that we can avert climate disaster, we can never give up. For example, 8 degrees of warming would be much worse than 4 degrees of warming, and could mean the difference between human extinction…
> For example, 8 degrees of warming would be much worse than 4 degrees of warming, and could mean the difference between human extinction and the mere collapse of our civilization.
I'm assuming celsius, not farenheit.
I'm curious why a mere 8 degrees increase leads to human extinction.
Is that "8 degrees evenly over the globe"? If so, that most certainly would leave the majority of land arable and comfortably livable.
Is that "8 degrees average with such a high deviation that no land is left with a year-round range of 0 degrees to 30 degrees"? If that is the case, where can I read/view/see the model that produces such an extreme outcome?
Re: Programming in the Apocalypse
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's some fairly absurd doomerism going on in the "climate catastrophe tomorrow" camp where climate change will (somehow) turn earth into a barren rock and we're inches away from triggering a self-reinforcing climate resonance cascade of unforeseen consequences. It's of course a very urgent issue, but I think exaggerating it until it becomes a threat to "all life on earth" levels is a) dishonest b) does nothing to…
> will (somehow) turn earth into a barren rock Well, hundreds of millios displaced and/or dead would be enough. Doesn't have to "turn earth into a barren rock". And as for "suddenly", many systems tend to have a breaking point, especially systems, like the environment, which have feedback loops that can easily feed into each other and make things worse fast. Collapse is seldom linear or a nice gradual curve.
> Well, hundreds of millios displaced and/or dead would be enough. Doesn't have to "turn earth into a barren rock".
Actually, yes it does. The OP specified "human extinction". We're arguing that single point. The fact that thousands/millions/billions might displaced isn't being contended.
Re: Programming in the Apocalypse
#130> Due to heat and power issues, it is likely that disruptions to home and office internet will be a much more common occurrence. As flooding and sea level rise disrupts commuting, working asynchronously is going to be the new norm.
Nah. I expect simple UI fashion transitions (e.g. round corners to square corners back to round corners) are likely to claim more of our time and attention over the next 30 years than the "serious" predictions in the article.