tried Gemini 3 and it said to drive, even dropped a type of joke:
> The Verdict
Drive it if you are using the car wash facilities (automatic, touchless, or self-serve bays). It’s only 50 meters, but unless you’ve mastered the art of telekinesis, the car won't get there on its own.
Yeah it was always a trick scammers used. Scam emails (the more obvious ones - not sophisticated phising) always had typos or subtle grammar errors because authors don't want to invest time in people that are able to spot such mistakes. It's the people that do not read thoroughly that are much more likely to fall for a scam.
I would imagine it might be the same with those ads.
> authors don't want to invest time in people that are able to spot such mistakes
This "just-so" story gets repeated constantly in threads about scams, but I've never seen anyone put up any actual proof. The more likely explanation is that scammers are just bad at English since they're predominantly from poor third-world countries.
Spelling and grammar checkers are free; online translators have been better than that for many years now.
It could be sloppiness, but I think scammers just organically copied efforts that worked, and those were the ones with poor presentations because they pre-filter and so target the scammers efforts more efficiently. The scammers need not be aware of why it works.
I skimmed the pdf; they show a model where having such an early "filter" is beneficial to the scammer, but doesn't provide any actual evidence that it applies in reality beyond restating the just-so story.
Maybe. But if the founders were at all pre-gold-rush Internet people, sentiments like "don't be evil" seemed (in my impression at the time) more the genuine norm than the exception.
I feel you, I have the exact same experience. I always see this and I'm bothered by it, yet most of the time nobody else sees it and it's hard to really convey to other people what you mean.
I feel very similarly having grown up with a very overprotective and overly attached mother. I'm constantly struggling with emotions and have a lot of self doubt and don't feel like Im in control of my life. Been slowly regaining this control and trying to improve myself via therapy.
Unfortunately right now I don't value my parents very much and Im resentful towards my mother. Perhaps that will change in future, perhaps not.
People are not perfect. I know it's hard now but I urge you not to resent your mother. If she was otherwise kind then she was just overprotective and overly attached because she loves you.
I think this is a very good answer and trying a similar approach and similar methods has helped me a lot in my life. Few years ago I was very easy to get angry over work and code (especially other peoples code!) and I could stay in this state for several hours. I would also often be not very nice when responding to PR comments.
Also wanted to specifically comment on
> When you feel bad, stop to think. Observe your own reaction and calmly try to realise why you’re feeling that way and what’s your goal. The introspection alone can make you see [...]
That sounds very close to mindfulness meditation - or any kind of meditation really. In my opinion that is also a great way yo get better understanding of oneself and it can help improve quality of life overall a lot.
In my opinion the most important factor was that it is a superset of JS and any valid Javascript code is/was valid TS code.
That allowed for gradual adoption and you didn't have to risk going all-in into new technology.
Also the `any` type [1]. It makes porting an existing project ridiculously easy: just type everything as `any`, and it also gives freedom to the developer to think in code when developing, trusting that they (will) know what they are doing, instead of screaming at the smallest mis-type with annoying bright red squiggly lines.
It is so liberating to type a variable as `any` when sketching new code, figuring things out, that I would venture to say that any language not having the `any` type actually actively hates the developer.
And then you have to contribute to a codebase with restrictive ESLint (bleurgh!) configuration, so you can't even try out whether your code works because the tooling disallows you from compiling it as long as it contains "any", and the other devs are like "but muh best practices". So not only you gotta work around TS, you gotta do it invisibly. How did people even live before VSCode's type hint popups covered up the previous line?
No, cringing at some "helpful" popup appearing right over the previous line of code. If anything, they could've made it appear under the current line; code's still written top to bottom so it's less likely for "suggested relevant info" to obscure the actual relevant info.
TS is emphatically not a superset of JS. It rejects perfectly valid JS leaving you no recourse other than design your whole architecture around what TypeScript allows. Which is what Microsoft wants of course.
You can directly import any valid JS module using TypeScript if you have “allowJS”: true in the compiler options of your tsconfig.json file. The comparison to FFI doesn’t make any sense. FFI requires compiling a special library that explicitly exports the C types. This is different than TS. Using TS, you can import any valid JS module without any special preparation. Also, you can’t import all compiled languages into each other using FFI. You can only import and export C-based types. There is no way to export a Go struct for consumption via FFI, for instance. All valid JS modules will work with TypeScript.
$ echo "export class Foo { a = 1 }" > test.mjs
$ npx ts-node
> import('./test.mjs').then(console.log)
error TS7016: Could not find a declaration file for module './test.mjs'. '/home/user/Lab/test.mjs' implicitly has an 'any' type.
$ npx ts-node -O '{"allowJs":true}'
> import('./test.mjs').then(console.log)
Promise { <pending > }
Error [ERR_REQUIRE_ESM]: require() of ES Module /home/user/Lab/test.mjs not supported.
$ echo "module.exports.Foo = class Foo { a = 1 }" > test.cjs
$ npx ts-node -O '{"allowJs":true}'
> const { Foo } = require('./test.cjs')
> Foo
[class Foo]
> new Foo
Foo { a = 1 }
> function bar (foo: Foo) {}
TS2749: 'Foo' refers to a value, but is being used as a type here. Did you mean 'typeof Foo'?
No I did not, TypeScript, and that's about as much as it seems to interoperate. I guess in some cases practical migration might be viable - but as for the general case, the out-of-the-box experience seems to speak otherwise.
It's not even viable to write in JS and manually write a DTS - no way to check em against each other. Except idk library in JS, test suite in TS anyway. So not a lot of lateral movement possible in practice.
I'm not even talking about the module support. (It just seems to have the default support of TypeScript.)
Yes, it imports the module. No, it doesn't do even basic type inference (knowing that Foo is a class and consequently allowing it to be used as a type name) - which it would, if it was a superset of JS. Instead it seems to import everything as "any", which is... a start, I guess?
Proper and wider research is important. Let's hope that these substances become more popular and available to be researched and tested, so that hopefully in 5-10 years we would know their risks and advantages. Then people could make educated decisions whether or not to try and use them.
But React is now probably about 7-8 years old. Is it really this shiny new technology that "everyone must jump to"? Yes jQuery devs probably don't get a lot of work right now, and yes you probably should keep up with React itself.
But I don't think that it is necessary to literally switch technology every 1-2 years to keep up, if we can use React (or Vue) which has been stable for a while and is still wildly popular.
But aren't the React devs of today the jQuery devs of tomorrow ? Meaning that if you keep that same technology forever you will lose relevance in the market.
I believe you are overexaggerating. It has always been true that you needed some kind of local server when doing frontend development. There are multiple browser mechanism that would not work in any way other than when rendering html/css/js that was returned from a server.
Consequently a build tool (or dev-tool) that offers you a dev-server is really nothing weird in frontend development world. Same as 10-15 years ago when using jQuery and PHP and you would use XAMPP or LAMPP.
Just google “front-end tools” and look at the few top results. There are many tools for front-end development that are not build tools or have to run on the server.
> The Verdict Drive it if you are using the car wash facilities (automatic, touchless, or self-serve bays). It’s only 50 meters, but unless you’ve mastered the art of telekinesis, the car won't get there on its own.