Chesterton’s fence is one I come across a lot. People see some confusing or not ideal code and immediately want to remove it, without understanding its purpose. I like stating it as “don’t assume the previous developers were idiots.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Chesterton%27s_fen...

Candidates would also have more information. They would have information about current employees and they could compare against their coworkers after they join.

What if your phone company charged you more to call/text specific companies or people? Or offered plans where you can only call specific companies for a reduced rate?

It would be very difficult for new companies to enter the market because people would not be able to call new companies, since they aren't under specific plans. The established players could effectively block new competition or make it incredibly expensive to enter the market.

What exactly do you recommend we should do instead? Make all service providers 100% neutral?

- All car dealerships should sell all brands of car.

- All grocery stores should sell all foods.

- All music streaming services should stream all songs.

- All movie streaming services should stream all movies.

- All movie theatres should play all movies.

- All phone companies should let you call all numbers for free.

- All radio stations should play all songs.

- All TV channels should play all shows.

- All cable providers should offer all channels.

- All devices should support all operating systems.

- All airlines should provide flights to all airports

- All stores should sell the same items for the same price.

I have yet to find anyone who supports a majority of the above statements, or is able to explain how they differ from net neutrality.

The tone and manner of your argument don't make think you're interested in understanding the opposing side. Trying to debate with people who insist the structure of the issue is exactly what they see though their ideological lens is unproductive and exhausting.

Your questions don't get answered not because they're devastating to the pro-neutrality position but because they don't address at all what net-neutrality proponents actually believe or why.

If all of the above were true it would be great for new companies and great for consumers with the downside of being unreasonably expensive to the middlemen (car dealerships, grocery stores, etc.). I would say the same thing doesn't apply to internet companies. It's not unreasonably expensive for them to carry all websites and in fact they are making great profits. I don't think the internet companies gaining more profit (by not being neutral) is worth the consumer and new company benefits lost.

The other major issue is competition. All the above examples have a lot of competition, but internet companies are a lot of times monopolies and duopolies. The consumer has no choice but to use them.

This is very interesting, but I would love to know more details. Are they using something like Amazon Kinesis or Kafka to send events and handle missed events? What serialization format are the messages? How do they manage keeping the schemas of the events in sync?

You say you are creating a more performant NPM. Is it impossible to fix the current NPM? Why not submit fixes back to NPM? Why create a new project?

The irony of this question should be apparent if you search for packages on npm today. How many "new projects" are there?

In answer, why not create a new project? NPM INC controls npm, hasn't contributed it to the node foundation (despite playing a pivotal role in creating said foundation), and hasn't been especially good at taking contributions recently.

A new project dodges all those existing problems, demonstrates alternate approaches are both feasible and compatible, and destroys the myth that npm is fundamental to node, rather than simply the first of many package management systems that take advantage of node's import semantics.

I wonder what reasons there are for not putting npm in a foundation in the same way that happened to Node itself? Surely such a critical piece of Node infrastructure shouldn't be controlled by a single (for-profit) company.

Works is ongoing, but npm is pretty complicated at this point

https://github.com/npm/npm/issues/10380

Its install process is very different from the one npm uses. E.g. just look into the node_modules directory produced by npm vs the one produced by ied.

Also the way it wires up dependencies (using symlinks) has been called "non humane design" by npm... so I thought it would be easier to just start a new project... it's not a lot of code/logic needed there actually... :)

npm v3 already uses the 'flat by default' design, so the node_modules folders aren't that different.

They are extremely different.

I made a quick comparison here: https://gist.github.com/alexanderGugel/a10ed5655d366875a280

Basically ied uses symlinks in order to resolve circular dependencies, while ied exploits the fact that require "falls back" in the directory structure.

Understood. Though I believe your comment (which compared ied with itself) should actually read:

> Basically ied uses symlinks in order to resolve circular dependencies, while npm exploits the fact that require "falls back" in the directory structure.

Yup. Thanks.

NPM has decided to risk the life of the entire Node ecosystem by taking on funding. Additionally, they aren't particularly good at npm--only after the much-awaited v3 has it approached a decent piece of software.

Are there any security implications for leap seconds? Do pseudo random number generators have any issues with 61 seconds in a minute?

I have yet to meet a [CS]PRNG that cares about the passage of time.

Some protocols that use prngs might make assumptions about the number of seconds in a minute, however.

    callbacks.forEach(Function.prototype.call.bind(Function.prototype.call));

It is just as long as the original and more convoluted, but much more fun.

Why not give it away? People come for the bootcamp and after the 12 weeks you represent them during their job search. The companies will pay you $5-15k, depending on the candidate, as a referral fee. No cost to the participants.

>The companies will pay you $5-15k, depending on the candidate, as a referral fee.

I have tried, and from what I've seen, it is quite difficult to get that sort of a relationship with a company. If you have a recruiting agency that has that sort of relationship with a big company? You can sell your recruiting agency for a lot of money.

If you don't have a relationship with the company doing the hiring, you have to go through recruiters who do, and you will get $0-$2500 per referral. I've placed a lot of people at this level. I've gotten $2500 once. The rest of the time? I get a "thank you" (and the person I placed, often, feels they owe me a favor.)

Very cool extension. Is there any way to use Clef/Walz to login on a phone?

It is a bug, we will fix it asap.