The problem of modern libc (newer than ~2004, I have no idea what that 1996 one is doing) isn't that old software stops working. It's that you can't compile software on your up to date desktop and have it run on your "security updates only" server. Or your clients "couple of years out of date" computers.

And that doesn't require using newer functionality.

But this is not "backwards compatibility". No one promises this type of "forward compatibility" that you are asking for (even win32 only does it exceptionally...).

Also, what is so hard about building in your "security updates only" server? Or a chroot of it at least ? As I was saying below, I have a Debian 2006-ish chroot for this purpose....

> most people thought the practical effects in software engineering were incremental too

Hum... Are you saying it's having clear positive (never mind "transformative") impact somewhere? Can you point any place we can see observable clear positive impact?

Just to point to anybody that comes here directly, the article has no relation at all with perceived illumination, color fidelity, or anything else people complain about leds.

It's an interesting niche topic that you may want your working place to notice if you work indoors.

The world seems to have changed since the events that led to this conclusion (that were mostly way before 2019).

Governments apparently learned how to assimilate protests and burn people down without any apparent violence, but still destroying their causes.

Occupy Wall Street was a turning point for me. It's staggering how many things today follow directly from the 2008 gfc and its disastrous aftermath.

The primary legacy of Occupy Wall Street is that "the 1%" became a meme. Enough so that policies are still evaluated on how they affect "the 1%" vs the rest of the population. The concentration of wealth in the US became much better known. It did not, however, reduce that concentration of wealth.

> It likely is wrong, that's fine

It's almost never fine, though. When it's fine, people aren't pressured into giving estimates.

> It likely is wrong, that's fine

The most you can do is say it. Communication demands effort from all involved parties, and way too many people in a position to demand estimates just refuse to put any effort into it.

Usually, it's a crime when people do stuff. Complaining that the government is bad is free in almost all democracies.

What counts as doing stuff? Minneapolis has been hitting the streets for days trying to chase a major federal agency out of Minnesota, a cause which I and my elected representatives publicly support. But it's a huge country, Minneapolis is thousands of miles away from me, and outside of airport security I haven't personally seen an agent of the federal government in years. To me, following federal agents around blowing whistles at them and yelling that they'd better leave town seems at least a little revolutionary - the feds certainly think so, they murdered someone for doing it this morning. But it’s also unambiguously permitted under US law.

Looks like the US exports were at all time highs last year... Pulled by gold and other precious metals:

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/exports

I couldn't find data to actually answer your question. I just found this that is surprising in a multitude of ways and absolutely useless :)

Every useful report seems to end at 2023.

You don't need to split your code over a network to have organizational convenience.

Your first point is valid. There are few ways to get it, and it's not clear if services are harder or easier than the alternatives.

> it's nice to know that team A is responsible for service B

Yet another argument that applies better or equally well to shared libraries.

I've made arguments for creating services at work. But it seems that every time somebody tries to make a reason for them at the web, it's not a reason to use services.

Are those people in an environment where they need to close tickets at any cost or else?

I've seen less capable people changing from slightly productive to incredibly destructive by changing that one variable.