Could it also be the USA system of dealers having to be 3rd party my law and therefore needing to mark up the price for their profit vs other markets where car companies run their own storefronts?
Favorite recent example, Chrome's audio blocking solution pretty much broke every HTML5 game in existence. 1000s of sites are still broken. To just name some easy categories, every Pico-8 game exported to HTML5, Every Unity and Unreal game exported to HTML5. Even 100s of Google's own Doodles, examples, promotions, etc ... until they pre-whitelisted every domain they own.
The worst is Apple. Trying to do anything game related in a webpage on iOS Safari is a nightmare and is pretty much guaranteed to break with each new iOS release. "minimal-ui" (nope, took that way), "user-scalable" (worked but they keep changing the conditions so old games break and have to reverse engineer under what conditions it's respected). I recently noticed one of my sites broke for audio. No errors, no mention of what changed that I can fine, worked 6 months ago, stopped working, Safari only. Note it's a site about audio and it doesn't start that audio until the user clicks the "Play" button. It's using the "resume" api but no sound comes out. Still works in Firefox and Chrome (after having to update it last year for Chrome's breaking change)
You're right that there's some risk - especially using API's that can also be abused. However, percentage-wise, the vast majority of works targeting browsers continue to work unmodified (at least in terms of interacting with the browser), making it a very stable platform and definitely not breaking as often and as likely as implied by the words "aggressive release cycle".
That said, it's definitely not yet feature-rich enough to fully displace Electron.
Only tangentially related but there's a very popular game with intentionally genderless characters. The creator does not wish it to be translated to certain languages in which it's difficult to keep things genderless. Some language choose a gender for all kinds of nouns so apparently it's hard to keep things genderless in those languages.
In Chinese, the first-person masculine and feminine pronouns are homophones. My teacher told me the he/she written forms were only introduced upon contact with Western languages. It's not uncommon for native Chinese speakers to mis-gender their family members when speaking English, since to (most of?) them, there's only a grammatical distinction when writing.
In college, I took a course on Chinese literature, translated into English. A couple of the stories relied on a plot twist regarding the gender of one of the main characters. Unfortunately, the plot was given away early in both because it was obvious the translator was going through great pains to avoid gendered pronouns in English.
Re: unconventional gender depiction in media, and how language and media affects thinking
By coincidence, I spent a long time reading various sci-fi books consecutively which each had nonstandard approaches to gender. One book series (Ancillary Justice) used she/her pronouns for all characters because the protagonist's culture did not have the social concept of gender, and in-story the protagonist mentions the choice of using female pronouns when translating the story into English. In many Greg Egan books, most of the characters are uploaded human minds or AIs which exist independently of any specific body or avatar, so traditional gender norms don't necessarily apply. In some Greg Egan books, the protagonist and some characters were agendered and used unconventional pronouns such as ve/ver/vis. In another Greg Egan book, none of the characters had gender, and male and female pronouns were used seemingly randomly and often changed for individual characters in text and dialog (I assume there may have been some grammatical, social, or situational pattern or intention to it).
These books each had interesting worlds that captivated me (for non-gender-related reasons). I often visualized scenes in my head and day-dreamed about the possibilities with the stories' technologies and characters. I quickly noticed that my mind usually wanted to use the characters' genders as the first step in picturing how a scene would look and play out. These books rarely answered the question of characters' genders (at least not in a way that matched up to my cultural expectations), so I had to break that habit in order to really get into the stories. I had to really think about the dynamics between the characters in order to imagine the books' scenes instead of doing my usual pattern-matching of scenes against preconceptions of how male and female characters interacted.
I think this shift in thinking stuck with me. The "male" and "female" buckets in my mind became much less defined. I think I truly internalized that those mental buckets are just shortcuts that we over-rely on. It became increasingly obvious to me that neither gender had an exclusive claim to any quality that I previously considered gendered, including qualities that I was attracted to. Long story short, I'm now in a same-sex relationship and identify as bisexual. It didn't occur to me as a possibility before these books. I know some people will read this and decide this all must mean that I was always wired up to be bisexual and in denial until now, but I don't think it's that. I believe the mind is much more plastic and malleable than most people think, but our culture rarely gives the opportunities to put this plasticity to use.
I would really like to see some more research done on Whorfian effects of gendered language. It certainly seems plausible that a language that forces speakers to remember and pay attention to every person's gender will affect how its speakers think, and there are plenty of languages that don't do that, for comparison, so perhaps there are some interesting experiments that could be done.
It's possible you only notice the productivity loss, but the gains are so seamless (sharing a screenshot, a chat that removes the need for a meeting etc.) that they aren't as noticeable.
You can always quit out of the program for a while if you need to really focus, I do that often.
The article on editors is basically "here's the names of 5 editors, now learn vim"
I know this will piss off vim users but in my experience vim users are seriously out date when it comes to dev tools. It's like they never left the 70s. vim might be great, it might be available everywhere but when I see a vim user I then see them use something like gdb and have clearly never experienced a modern debugger because if they had they'd be infuriated at how their debugging tools haven't improved in 30 years.
I'm sure others could go into all the features a modern editor or IDE provide. The vim users will say they don't need that crap. They sound like some grandpa saying "back in my we had to walk to 5 miles to school, no one had invented bicycles or cars or buses. Don't need those new fangled things, now Get off my Lawn!"
My experience of IDE users (myself included much of the time) is that they don't know how limited their debugging experience is, just breakpoints and how to step through code. Things like breaking when a variable is set, debugging from a core dump, creating a core dump under certain conditions, viewing the assembly, setting variables on the fly etc, are features of a good debugger (often the one they're using) that are obscured from them.
Exact opposite of my experience. IDEs let me easily add conditional break points, toggle between source, disassembly, source+disassembly, set variables just by clicking on them, view multiple areas of memory in different tabs/windows. Set how that memory is viewed (bytes, words, dwords, floats, as a type of class/struct, array of classes/structs), show different contexts at once, have multiple windows per thread/process, never seen someone use one that didn't know those features exist as they are all obvious to discover in an IDE.
sounds like you've never used one but then that's what I'd guess from watching most vim users. All of those have been standard features of visual IDE debuggers for over 30 years. Mean while instead of seeing every thing update live I watch the vim users type various gdb print and dump commands at the command line and then watch that data scroll off their terminal instead of being updated live as they progress like an IDE debugger.
> sounds like you've never used one but then that's what I'd guess from watching most vim users
You'd be mistaken, I've spent a huge chunk of my adult life inside Visual Studio. IME most devs don't even know you can add a condition to a breakpoint (hiding feature behind right clicks aren't obvious) and anything complicated turns into a very convoluted process very quickly. Even setting conditional breakpoints are basically an input into the command interface, essentially what the windows run menu is to the command line.
Take this short tutorial (https://amazingdim.wordpress.com/2014/02/01/gdb-script/) on gdb scripting and show me how to do similar through an IDE. With Visual Studio at least it is much more complicated, here are a few google results on that path:
You’re assuming that Vim users use only Vim. I use Vim all the time for editing config files, small Ruby scripts, and JavaScript projects without types – for these cases it is among the best tools for the job. And when I work on, for example, big Java projects, I use IntelliJ IDEA plus a Vim keybindings plugin, so I can use the IDE’s debugger and its refactoring support. Don’t make sweeping generalizations about Vim users not knowing when other tools are appropriate.
https://github.com/domenic/proposal-function-prototype-tostr...