Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | weare138's commentslogin

I caught this video a few days ago. In a normal world all these people would be in prison.

The CEO of a company constantly looking and sounding high AF might be a red flag too.

Warning: This article is best viewed in a Chromium-based browser (Chrome, Edge, Vivaldi, etc.) for intended rendering of stacking marks.

Chromium is the new Internet Explorer.


  perl -E 'say " " x (`tput cols`/2 - $_) . "*" x ++$i and $i++ for 1..shift' 25


For fuck sake, for-profit side of Mozilla, get a damn grip!

Update, since this is getting traction on Reddit

I'm not against Mozilla making money. Like a regular citizen needs to make money, companies and even nonprofits need it too.

Don't second guess yourself OP. Firefox is not a product. It's an open-source project countless people have contributed their time and dime to over the years. The Mozilla corporation didn't create Firefox, the open-source community did. Mozilla was entrusted to be the stewards of the project and have repeatedly violated that trust. Mozilla is commoditizing other people's hard work while enriching themselves in the process at the expense of the community and abused the trust we placed in them to get away with it.


#MakeUsenetGreatAgain


Then use one of the type systems for Perl.

https://metacpan.org/pod/Type::Tiny


You can't do that if you gave up at the very first sigil puzzle.

I'm fine with that: to program in Perl you need to be able to follow manuals, man pages, expert answers, - and even perl cookbooks, or CPAN or web searches. It's a technical tool. The swiss army chainsaw. It's worth it.


Seems like you and a few other posters are making the article's point – that Perl's culture is hermetic and that new programmers would rather learn Python, Ruby or Javascript rather than figure out which sigil means what.


I wouldn't call it hermetic in that the many forms of documentation are insanely thorough and accessible - if not well advertised. There is no gate-keeping (from my point of view). New users are welcome. It's easy to learn (for the people for whom reading is not an obstacle).

But yes, no contest that the world has been on a simplicity binge. Python won by pushing simplicity and by having giant software corporations choosing it (and not complaining about the line noise nonsense). If you want to go into programming professionally, for now many years, you need python.

I don't know that I would put Javascript in the same bag. I mean, it's the other way: it looks simple and it isn't.

But python, yes, python won because it looks simple and google pushed it.

Many other languages now have to reckon with the python supremacy. This is not specific to perl / raku. It will take work for anything to replace python.


Then don't use the low level interfaces. In Perl, language features are plug and play. Everything's in a module. Use the core module List::Util instead.


The subject of the article is about how one of the widely cited papers on the subject was ghost written by Monsanto, the company that produces Glyphosate. That was the accepted science everyone was trusting which we now know is flat out academic fraud.

So how do we know the assessments from organizations like the WHO weren't also based on this same faulty and fraudulent 'science' that was, at the time, widely accepted in academia? We would have to logically assume that any scientific conclusions based on fraudulent scientific studies and false data can not be provably true.

Your assertion relies on circular logic.


What is the probability that Monsanto has managed to pay everyone to say it safe.

Proving everyone else wrong is quite the incentive for a researcher. To me it's sound unlikely that no one else would jump on the opportunity of fame for proving that it's actually harmful. Money is something but that's not the primary motivator of researchers, otherwise they would be doing way more lucrative work with their intelligence.


..and works very well if you do know what you are doing

That's the issue. AI coding agents are only as good as the dev behind the prompt. It works for you because you have an actual background in software engineering of which coding is just one part of the process. AI coding agents can't save the inexperienced from themselves. It just helps amateurs shoot themselves in the foot faster while convincing them they're a marksman.


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

Search: