Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Get in zoomer, we're saving React

acko.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 251 posts

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#161

Post by api »

mwcampbell wrote: post #157
mikrl wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(As an elder cusper due to being terminally online for 15 years) 2020s pop culture so far is miles better than what we had in the early 2010s and IMO the 20 year olds are far more tolerable than they were when I was 20. All the complaints about them are still valid IMO but even then I see it as less of a problem than the pathologies of previous generations.

> All the complaints about them are still valid Including the complaint from the OP about how zoomers are passive? If it's true (which I'm not convinced of), it seems like a fatal flaw, unless you're saying that inaction is preferable to some of the pathologies of previous generations (presumably including mine; I was born in 1980).

I think the OP means passive in terms of technology. They work entirely in walled gardens with constrained UIs and know of nothing different.

It’s not the zoomers fault though. It was the previous generation or two that built this hellscape of cloud software and addiction oriented UIs.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#162

Post by KronisLV »

williamcotton wrote: post #130
foobarbecue wrote: post #119

I wonder about this: > A templating language ... targets a weird imagined archetype of someone who isn't allergic to code, but somehow isn't smart enough to work in a genuine programming language. In my experience, this archetype doesn't actually exist. In my day job, I write "sequences" to command a spacecraft, in a neutered "sequencing language" with conditionals but no looping. Several people on our team who are g…

Creating ways for people to interact and control a computer by writing but who don’t need to know about deploying to production, scaling databases, managing memory resources, etc, seems like a good division of labor. There are two forces at work here when this division of labor disappears: 1.) increasing complexity in the tool designed for non-computer engineers and 2.) the subtleties of a class of worker who don’t w…

> Creating ways for people to interact and control a computer by writing but who don’t need to know about deploying to production, scaling databases, managing memory resources, etc, seems like a good division of labor.

I guess it depends on the domain and the lines along which you want to divide your project along. If someone can write back end code but doesn't really know that much about databases, you might end up with an application that does hundreds of database queries just to display one application view or prepare a REST query response.

If someone counts as a full stack developer but ends up producing a singleton app that cannot scale to more than one instance (e.g. stores important data in application memory, even things like user sessions), then you also probably have a bit of a problem on your hands.

If someone counts as a DevOps engineer but doesn't think too much about security, you might end up with a database instance that's publicly available, increasing the attack surface of your system a whole lot.

You can have a division of technical and non-technical folks, you can have a division between the different types of technical folks, but you absolutely do need at least someone who can wear all of the different hats (e.g. partake in a particular role) out there, in addition to them being present at the correct time to bring up things that are actually (or should be) blockers, which would otherwise get overlooked and would result in a horrendous implementation.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#163

Post by tartoran »

yellow_lead wrote: post #81
qprofyeh wrote: post #80

Author uses a tone, terms and phrases (FOB) that are really off putting. It’s sad because the subject is interesting. Luckily this HN thread is great.

If this was a rant on boomers, it would be seen as ageist. Let's not blame all the new stuff on the new generation, it's not like a hoard of zoomersTM wrote react right after graduation.

I don’t blame it on the new generation at all and the boomer zoomer dichotomy bothers me quite a bit. I just want us all to steer away from this disaster in the making.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#164

Post by georgyo »

StuckDuck wrote: post #118
ricardobayes wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought windows had bad UX until I tried macOS. Maybe my taste is different than others but I found macOS UX to be really confusing. I particularly disliked the iconset. Interestingly this is not true for iOS and iPadOS, those are magnificent.

I'd say macOS actually is a lot more polished than Windows, but I agree with you that it is damn confusing. Try "closing" an app for example and you'll find that half the time it will not have closed properly, or maybe it did, who knows? It depends on the app. If it's vanilla you can bet it will have to be closed with CMD+Q

This is actually more confusing then windows.

The visual UI element to close does not close. Instead you must click File->Quit or CMD+q.

These are not intuitive and must be learned.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#165

Post by mwcampbell »

api wrote: post #161
mwcampbell wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All the complaints about them are still valid Including the complaint from the OP about how zoomers are passive? If it's true (which I'm not convinced of), it seems like a fatal flaw, unless you're saying that inaction is preferable to some of the pathologies of previous generations (presumably including mine; I was born in 1980).

I think the OP means passive in terms of technology. They work entirely in walled gardens with constrained UIs and know of nothing different. It’s not the zoomers fault though. It was the previous generation or two that built this hellscape of cloud software and addiction oriented UIs.

Ah, makes sense. But then, the OP also said zoomers don't know how to dance. But, as an admittedly curmudgeonly early forty-something, I wonder if that's at least partly because so much of current pop music is garbage. Then again, I guess most of any generation's pop music has always been crap; we only remember the classics from the past.

Back to technology, though, I worry about what computing will be like for Generation Alpha (born after 2010 according to Wikipedia), including my nieces and nephew. Perhaps I didn't help matters by buying them Amazon Fire tablets when they were little, though my siblings and in-laws certainly appreciated it. I feel like intervening to get them started on some kind of more open computing platform, but I fear I might sabotage the development of a new, better computing culture if I try too hard to replicate what things were like for me growing up with an Apple II and early PCs. Edit: And no, I don't feel qualified to become a father myself so I can avoid meddling with others' kids. So I guess I'll just stay on the sidelines, watch, and try to keep my opinions to myself.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#166

Post by tartoran »

berjin wrote: post #76
encryptluks2 wrote: post #27

> We're Saving React Website proceeds to slowly load and runs like crap.

It's the only site I've seen that doesn't work with dark reader. My millennial retinas are seared from the rays of brightness.

Tell that to the visually impaired. Never mind those fancy websites don’t have accessibility in mind

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#168

Post by Rapzid »

chris_armstrong wrote: post #39

This article is weird linking together many unrelated strands of thought. Like linking reactive programming to “reactive” UIs, when really they mean UIs that are forgiving to their users instead of breaking down. Or how by coding on the web we’ve lost the immediacy of a UI that runs on our desktop, and the primitives (like undo/redo stacks) that make desktop user interfaces friendlier, at least without having to buil…

The article started really strong and I believe the point about React and knock-off frameworks not evolving to really solve challenges modern web applications face is good and worth exploring.

Then it took an awkward and very long detour into gushing over Apple design.

And it "circled back" to a rant that seemed to trivialize things like collaborative editing and undo/redo like they were generically solved problems in the past. No, collaborative editing was not a solved problem 20 years ago. It's an evolving space with recent advancements in the CRDT space from Yjs and Automerge really opening things up.

Started really good but I was hoping it would have ended up with an analysis of the gap between where React (and browsers in general) are currently and where it ought to be; with some ideas around how to cross the gap.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#169

Post by noobermin »

kristopolous wrote: post #115
mwcampbell wrote: post #44

> What's really frustrating about all this is how passive and helpless the current generation of web developers seem to be in all this. It's as if they've all been lulled into complacency by convenience. They seem afraid to carve out their own ambitious paths, and lack serious gusto for engineering. If there isn't a "friendly" bot spewing encouraging messages with plenty of emoji at every turn, they won't engage. > A…

Things used to require much more competency. For instance, I've been looking at old Byte Magazine issues on archive.org Let's take November 1982. Here's an article on building a video digitizer ( https://archive.org/details/byte-magazine-1982-11/page/n175/... ) complete with circuit diagrams, signal examples, and a control program in 6502 assembly. Hobbyist magazine. For enthusiasts. If I had a candidate that did thi…

Was about to upvote then you said 6502 asm isn't useful in 2022... If anything, learning 6502 asm is instructive because it isn't very abstract but forces you to turn abstract thinking to explicit instructions.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#170

Post by Rapzid »

tuukkah wrote: post #102
AaronFriel wrote: post #21

I thought this was the most insightful part, though it would be the second most if the author did more than allude to conflict-free replicated data types. Whenever you build a tiny language for the purpose of templating, it's worth asking yourself if it's really worth it to have to reinvent variables, loops, branches, scoping, expressions, and functions... Poorly. > Many competing frameworks acted like this wasn't so…

Yes, JSX (and React) is interesting in this way: it's not a (full) template language. Instead, it's a convenient way to write component fragments that include HTML/XML expressions and further components. Each component top-level is still JavaScript statements. There's also an escape hatch to include arbitrary JS expressions inside your JSX expressions, although perhaps we should use it only to include variables and n…

JSX is a Javascript syntax extension.
Post reply on HN