Full-of-logic, logic-less, and less-logic solutions

It is named "Mustache" because of heavy use of braces, { }, that resemble a sideways moustache.

But of course this could be overused.

About the argument against it, "{@const will make code less consistent ": I think the same is true now, since people can come up with very different ways of dealing with the "computed value inside each loop/if function" problem. Some extract components, some use functions, some will prepare the array differently beforehand.

<p>{(x *= 4)} {(x *= x)} {(x *= x)}</p>

(One can already destructure the loop variable but using a store obtained that way currently throws an error - Stores must be declared at the top level of the component (this may change in a future version of Svelte))

npm install npm run dev

This reactive statement is just used to have the store automatically subscribed and unsubscribed.

Svelte doesn't re-render, so you need to respond to component mount/dismount and prop changes separately as they are distinct concepts and never tied together, unlike in React.

One thing I considered was abusing a custom store for this kind of thing.

the code is a bit verbose/convoluted

Using another reactive statement with $effect we have Svelte automatically handle subscribing and unsubscribing to the store

The Svelte compiler does the dependency tracking work for us, so there’s no dependency array like in React.

This library takes inspiration from Tailwind and utilizes Otion to provide means of efficiently generating atomic styles from shorthand syntax and appending them to the DOM at runtime.

Sometimes, you may be tempted to write that wrapper. Because all your (React or Vue or insert your reactive framework here) instincts tell you so.Resist the temptation. There is a better way. A svelter way. Introducing: the use-directive (a.k.a. “actions”).

However, especially when starting out, it’s very easy to fall into the “this is how I did things in my previous framework” trap.

It can feel like a breeze of fresh summer air.

Note how we have to duplicate the code between these two lifecycle methods in class. This is because in many cases we want to perform the same side effect regardless of whether the component just mounted, or if it has been updated. Conceptually, we want it to happen after every render — but React class components don’t have a method like this. We could extract a separate method but we would still have to call it in two places.

fewer faithful supports

But these lookalike audiences aren’t just potential new customers — they can also be used to exclude unwanted customers in the future, creating a sort of ad targeting demographic blacklist.

How consumers would be expected to navigate this invisible, unofficial credit-scoring process, given that they’re never informed of its existence, remains an open question.

“It sure smells like the prescreening provisions of the FCRA,” Reidenberg told The Intercept. “From a functional point of view, what they’re doing is filtering Facebook users on creditworthiness criteria and potentially escaping the application of the FCRA.”

In an initial conversation with a Facebook spokesperson, they stated that the company does “not provide creditworthiness services, nor is that a feature of Actionable Insights.” When asked if Actionable Insights facilitates the targeting of ads on the basis of creditworthiness, the spokesperson replied, “No, there isn’t an instance where this is used.” It’s difficult to reconcile this claim with the fact that Facebook’s own promotional materials tout how Actionable Insights can enable a company to do exactly this. Asked about this apparent inconsistency between what Facebook tells advertising partners and what it told The Intercept, the company declined to discuss the matter on the record,

YouTube doesn’t give an exact recipe for virality. But in the race to one billion hours, a formula emerged: Outrage equals attention.

A 2015 clip about vaccination from iHealthTube.com, a “natural health” YouTube channel, is one of the videos that now sports a small gray box.

When Wojcicki took over, in 2014, YouTube was a third of the way to the goal, she recalled in investor John Doerr’s 2018 book Measure What Matters.“They thought it would break the internet! But it seemed to me that such a clear and measurable objective would energize people, and I cheered them on,” Wojcicki told Doerr. “The billion hours of daily watch time gave our tech people a North Star.” By October, 2016, YouTube hit its goal.

The conundrum isn’t just that videos questioning the moon landing or the efficacy of vaccines are on YouTube. The massive “library,” generated by users with little editorial oversight, is bound to have untrue nonsense. Instead, YouTube’s problem is that it allows the nonsense to flourish. And, in some cases, through its powerful artificial intelligence system, it even provides the fuel that lets it spread.#lazy-img-336042387:before{padding-top:66.68334167083543%;}

Somewhere along the last decade, he added, YouTube prioritized chasing profits over the safety of its users. “We may have been hemorrhaging money,” he said. “But at least dogs riding skateboards never killed anyone.”

A more active stance by librarians, journalists, educators, and others who convey truth-seeking habits is essential.

Meta co-founder and CEO Sam Molyneux writes that “Going forward, our intent is not to profit from Meta’s data and capabilities; instead we aim to ensure they get to those who need them most, across sectors and as quickly as possible, for the benefit of the world.”

Meanwhile, politicians from the two major political parties have been hammering these companies, albeit for completely different reasons. Some have been complaining about how these platforms have potentially allowed for foreign interference in our elections.3 3. A Conversation with Mark Warner: Russia, Facebook and the Trump Campaign, Radio IQ|WVTF Music (Apr. 6, 2018), https://www.wvtf.org/post/conversation-mark-warner-russia-facebook-and-trump-campaign#stream/0 (statement of Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.): “I first called out Facebook and some of the social media platforms in December of 2016. For the first six months, the companies just kind of blew off these allegations, but these proved to be true; that Russia used their social media platforms with fake accounts to spread false information, they paid for political advertising on their platforms. Facebook says those tactics are no longer allowed—that they've kicked this firm off their site, but I think they've got a lot of explaining to do.”). Others have complained about how they’ve been used to spread disinformation and propaganda.4 4. Nicholas Confessore & Matthew Rosenberg, Facebook Fallout Ruptures Democrats’ Longtime Alliance with Silicon Valley, N.Y. Times (Nov. 17, 2018), https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/17/technology/facebook-democrats-congress.html (referencing statement by Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.): “Mr. Tester, the departing chief of the Senate Democrats’ campaign arm, looked at social media companies like Facebook and saw propaganda platforms that could cost his party the 2018 elections, according to two congressional aides. If Russian agents mounted a disinformation campaign like the one that had just helped elect Mr. Trump, he told Mr. Schumer, ‘we will lose every seat.’”). Some have charged that the platforms are just too powerful.5 5. Julia Carrie Wong, #Breaking Up Big Tech: Elizabeth Warren Says Facebook Just Proved Her Point, The Guardian (Mar. 11, 2019), https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/mar/11/elizabeth-warren-facebook-ads-break-up-big-tech (statement of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)) (“Curious why I think FB has too much power? Let's start with their ability to shut down a debate over whether FB has too much power. Thanks for restoring my posts. But I want a social media marketplace that isn't dominated by a single censor. #BreakUpBigTech.”). Others have called attention to inappropriate account and content takedowns,6 6. Jessica Guynn, Ted Cruz Threatens to Regulate Facebook, Google and Twitter Over Charges of Anti-Conservative Bias, USA Today (Apr. 10, 2019), https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2019/04/10/ted-cruz-threatens-regulate-facebook-twitter-over-alleged-bias/3423095002/ (statement of Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.)) (“What makes the threat of political censorship so problematic is the lack of transparency, the invisibility, the ability for a handful of giant tech companies to decide if a particular speaker is disfavored.”). while some have argued that the attempts to moderate discriminate against certain political viewpoints.

It would allow end users to determine their own tolerances for different types of speech but make it much easier for most people to avoid the most problematic speech, without silencing anyone entirely or having the platforms themselves make the decisions about who is allowed to speak.

A spokeswoman for Summit said in an e-mail, “We only use information for educational purposes. There are no exceptions to this.” She added, “Facebook plays no role in the Summit Learning Program and has no access to any student data.”

Having low scores posted for all coworkers to see was “very embarrassing,” said Steph Buja, who recently left her job as a server at a Chili’s in Massachusetts. But that’s not the only way customers — perhaps inadvertently — use the tablets to humiliate waitstaff. One diner at Buja’s Chili’s used Ziosk to comment, “our waitress has small boobs.”According to other servers working in Ziosk environments, this isn’t a rare occurrence.

Systems like Ziosk and Presto allow customers to channel frustrations that would otherwise end up on public platforms like Yelp — which can make or break a restaurant — into a closed system that the restaurant controls.

I literally couldn’t remember when I’d last looked at my RSS subscriptions. On the surface, that might seem like a win: Instead of painstakingly curating my own incoming news, I can effortlessly find an endless supply of interesting, worthwhile content that the algorithm finds for me. The problem, of course, is that the algorithm isn’t neutral: It’s the embodiment of Facebook and Twitter’s technology, data analysis, and most crucial, business model. By relying on the algorithm, instead of on tags and RSS, I’m letting an army of web developers, business strategists, data scientists, and advertisers determine what gets my attention. I’m leaving myself vulnerable to misinformation, and manipulation, and giving up my power of self-determination.

Safiya Noble, Algorithms of Oppression (New York: New York University Press, 2018). See also Mozilla’s 2019 Internet Health Report at https://internethealthreport.org/2019/lets-ask-more-of-ai/.

eight years after release, men are 43% more likely to be taken back under arrest than women; African-Americans are 42% more likely than whites, and high-school dropouts are three times more likely to be rearrested than college graduates.

And so The Year of Intentional Internet began.

Mr. Duncombe published the results online using CommentPress, open-source software by the Institute for the Future of the Book. Online discussion and commenting is made possible by Social Book, a social-reading platform created by the institute.

Blogs tend towards conversational and quotative reuse, which is great for some subject areas, but not so great for others. Wiki feeds forward into a consensus process that provides a high level of remix and reuse, but at the expense of personal control and the preservation of divergent goals.

Here’s my pitch for a Dumb Twitter app: The app forces you to tweet at the original 140 character tweet length. You can reply. You can’t like or retweet. You most certainly can’t quote tweet. There is no private DMing. Linear tweet stream only.

Anyone who's dealt with networks knows that the network knows more than the individual."

academia is built on the premise (IMHO) of getting a good idea, parlaying that into a job and tenure, and waiting for death. I’ve had a lot of colleagues and acquaintances ask why I would bother blogging. Ask why I share all of this content online. Ask why I’m not afraid that someone is going to steal my ideas.

Thanks to the fact that we kept our own domain when we moved to Medium, all the articles and links still work.

Boiled down, Medium is sim­ply mar­ket­ing in the ser­vice of more mar­ket­ing. It is not a “place for ideas.” It is a place for ad­ver­tis­ers. It is, there­fore, ut­terly superfluous.

The other reason I am writing it, however, is that I know that many of my fellow exvies have, like me, struggled for years to make an open break with their families because of the pressure to conform that comes from inherently abusive fundamentalist socialization.

By the end of the course, my professor encouraged me to purchase my own domain. Her concern was for authorial control that would signal to readers that my content should be treated according to the media and academic logics where citations and attributions are normative. I used a pre-paid credit card to purchase my domain and the website followed me to graduate school.

However there are going to be lots of scenarios where students are required to use institutional tech. In those cases I still think we need to more willing to delete by default, and not leave the burden on the students. It’s a different mind-set – to purposefully throw away data – but I think it’s becoming a fundamental privacy issue.

However, although their approaches are different, one thing ASM have in common is their emphasis on network and code pedagogies: that is, trying to help users become coders and technicians, “sociologists of software,” to draw on Simondon (2010), who are far more able to shape ASM to meet their needs. Thus, developers of ASM do more than just make media systems; they teach others how to use them and modify them. As Matt Lee of GNU social argues,it is vitally important to me that anyone can set up a GNU social server on virtually any web hosting. I also want to make it as easy as possible to set up and install. To that end, I will personally help anyone who wants to get set up.

Affective forecasting is the process by which we attempt to pre-dict how we will feel in the future. One of the ways we fail at this task is called the end of history illusion,which suggests that we’re well aware of how much we’ve changed in the past ten years, but we imagine that that’s it—we’re done changing. When asked how much we think we’ll change in the next ten years, we assume we’re done.

The goal of school is for students to learn. What we incentivize, however, is getting good grades.

Scholars like Annette Gordon-Reed and Woody Holton have given us a deeper understanding of the ways in which leaders like Thomas Jefferson committed to new ideas of freedom even as they continued to be deeply committed to slavery.

In the meantime, the classification of viruses remains unclear. Tupanviruses seem to be dependent on their hosts for very little, and other viruses, according to one preprint, even encode ribosomal proteins. “The gap between cellular organisms and viruses is starting to close,” Deeg said.

Almost every social network of note had an early signature proof of work hurdle. For Facebook it was posting some witty text-based status update. For Instagram, it was posting an interesting square photo. For Vine, an entertaining 6-second video. For Twitter, it was writing an amusing bit of text of 140 characters or fewer. Pinterest? Pinning a compelling photo. You can likely derive the proof of work for other networks like Quora and Reddit and Twitch and so on. Successful social networks don't pose trick questions at the start, it’s usually clear what they want from you.

In this way they have come to dominate what I call “the division of learning in society”, which is now the central organising principle of the 21st-century social order, just as the division of labour was the key organising principle of society in the industrial age.

Chetty is also using tax data to measure the long-term impacts of dozens of place-based interventions, such as enterprise zones, which use tax and other incentives to draw businesses into economically depressed areas.

Update again: I annotated Audrey’s post

monk’s tomb in 1886

Solid’s State primitive is arguably its most powerful and distinctive one. Through the use of proxies and explicit setters it gives the control of an immutable interface and the performance of a mutable one

Very few were interested in furthering the platform in the places they just took for granted.

but everything they were doing started to make sense

Over time Adam, Surplus' creator, had less and less time to spend on the project and I decided to take my own shot.

But Vue’s simplicity runs more deeply in its design.

Redux, which features a single store, often called a single source of truth

Transparent debugging: a <div> is just a div.

COVID-19 mutation may be evolving to bypass mask-wearing, hand-washing

In 1972 David L. Parnas published a classic paper entitled On the Criteria To Be Used in Decomposing Systems into Modules. It appeared in the December issue of the Communications of the ACM, Volume 15, Number 12. In this paper, Parnas compared two different strategies for decomposing and separating the logic in a simple algorithm. The paper is fascinating reading, and I strongly urge you to study it. His conclusion, in part, is as follows: “We have tried to demonstrate by these examples that it is almost always incorrect to begin the decomposition of a system into modules on the basis of a flowchart. We propose instead that one begins with a list of difficult design decisions or design decisions which are likely to change. Each module is then designed to hide such a decision from the others.”

"Let me try to explain to you, what to my taste is characteristic for all intelligent thinking. It is, that one is willing to study in depth an aspect of one's subject matter in isolation for the sake of its own consistency, all the time knowing that one is occupying oneself only with one of the aspects. We know that a program must be correct and we can study it from that viewpoint only; we also know that it should be efficient and we can study its efficiency on another day, so to speak. In another mood we may ask ourselves whether, and if so: why, the program is desirable. But nothing is gained —on the contrary!— by tackling these various aspects simultaneously. It is what I sometimes have called "the separation of concerns", which, even if not perfectly possible, is yet the only available technique for effective ordering of one's thoughts, that I know of. This is what I mean by "focussing one's attention upon some aspect": it does not mean ignoring the other aspects, it is just doing justice to the fact that from this aspect's point of view, the other is irrelevant. It is being one- and multiple-track minded simultaneously.

But maybe this PR should still be merged until he finds time for that?

IMO, the conditional needs to be added to detach to fix all manifestations of this error.

remaining: 0, callbacks: [] r: 0, // remaining outros c: [], // callbacks p: outros // parent group

Why the obfuscation of remaining to r and callbacks to c? This is fine for function-local variables but in this instance makes the code significantly harder to reason about? There is no notion of what c and r mean.

From npm@5.2.0, npm ships with npx package which lets you run commands from a local node_modules/.bin or from a central cache.

By default, npx will check whether <command> exists in $PATH, or in the local project binaries, and execute that. Calling npx <command> when <command> isn't already in your $PATH will automatically install a package with that name from the NPM registry for you, and invoke it. When it's done, the installed package won’t be anywhere in your globals, so you won’t have to worry about pollution in the long-term. You can prevent this behaviour by providing --no-install option.

Actually just returning the loginDaoCall works fine. I dont really get what's different as it is the looked like it was the same instance, but probably not.

I don't think we need more tooling here.

I used a "specific function". But maybe it could be done within a derived store. A kind of auto reset on ... But I think there is no elagant solution, so I stick with the specific function.

As you can see, it uses Javascript label syntax to tell the compiler where recalculation should be carefully managed. And you thought that no one uses labels any more.

While Webpack is focused on using CommonJS as its primary module system and converting everything to that, Rollup decided to take the opposite approach — focusing on ES Modules instead.

Unfortunately, many third party libraries, even though they are written in ESM, are published to npm as CJS modules, so we still need to concatenate them.

Wow, no answers to this question. That's too bad. Did you ever find the solution?

After years of copy-pasted, locally-hosted scripts, maybe Bower if you were lucky, npm has finally made it possible to easily distribute client-side packages.

But this is only a halfway decent way to clarify that this is an external dependency, because the only way to resolve a peer dependency warning is to install react from npm—there's no way to notify npm that you resolve the dependency to a browser global. So peer dependencies should be avoided in favor of external declarations. Then Rollup will take care of warning about "unresolved dependencies", even if external declarations can't express a particular version range with which your library is compatible like peer dependencies can.

But library users are more numerous, and so their needs are more important.

remember that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few

small modules allow library authors to become lazy. Why include that six-line helper function when you can do a one-line `require`?

These are all things that make your life as a library author easier.

possibly making it harder for them to appreciate how severe the discoverability issues are for the rest of us.

I think I know why: it’s because the small modules philosophy favours library authors (like Sindre) at the ultimate expense of library users.

What I believe should happen is the Svelte compiler should, when a promise is passed to onMount, realise that a promise has been passed, and await the result of the function to be used as the onDestroy function. i.e, it should behave the exact same way for an async function as it does for a non-async function (if this is possible)

answered

Also Svelte is so great because developer do not need to worry about class names conflict, except of passing (global) classes to component (sic!).

Thank you, but this answers the question and means I will be unable to use svelte.

The problem with working around the current limitations of Svelte style (:global, svelte:head, external styles or various wild card selectors) is that the API is uglier, bigger, harder to explain AND it loses one of the best features of Svelte IMO - contextual style encapsulation. I can understand that CSS classes are a bit uncontrollable, but this type of blocking will just push developers to work around it and create worse solutions.

Svelte will not offer a generic way to support style customizing via contextual class overrides (as we'd do it in plain HTML). Instead we'll invent something new that is entirely different. If a child component is provided and does not anticipate some contextual usage scenario (style wise) you'd need to copy it or hack around that via :global hacks.

The main rationale for this PR is that, in my hones opinion, Svelte needs a way to support style overrides in an intuitive and close to plain HTML/CSS way. What I regard as intuitive is: Looking at how customizing of styles is being done when applying a typical CSS component framework, and making that possible with Svelte.

Explicit interfaces are preferable, even if it places greater demand on library authors to design both their components and their style interfaces with these things in mind.

For my point of view, and I've been annoyingly consistent in this for as long as people have been asking for this feature or something like it, style encapsulation is one of the core principles of Svelte's component model and this feature fundamentally breaks that. It would be too easy for people to use this feature and it would definitely get abused removing the style safety that Svelte previously provided.

This is a framework and it comes with certain opinions about how things should be done, this isn't unique to Svelte. And before we can decide whether or not we will allow certain behaviour or encourage it with better ergonomics, we have to have a conversation about whether or not we should be doing things that way. You can't separate the can from the should in an opinionated framework. We want to make building UIs simpler, for sure, but also safer we don't want to add ease of use at the expense of component encapsulation, there has to be a balance

This has already forced me to forgo Svelte Material because I would like to add some actions to their components but I cannot and it does not make sense for them to cater to my specific use-case by baking random stuff into the library used by everyone.

The point of the feature is to not rely on the third-party author of the child component to add a prop for every action under the sun. Rather, they could just mark a recipient for actions on the component (assuming there is a viable target element), and then consumers of the library could extend the component using whatever actions they desire.

Your LazyLoad image is now inextensible. What if you want to add a class? Perhaps the author of LazyLoad thought of that and sets className onto the <img>. But will the author consider everything? Perhaps if we get {...state} attributes.

I like use. But we would still need a noun to reference them by in the docs or libraries.

one problem with 'behavior' is that's the terminology we use to describe all of a component's encapsulated logic — methods, transitions, etc.

<LazyLoad component="img" data-src="giant-photo.jpg" class="my-cool-image" />

<LazyLoad> <img data-src='giant-photo.jpg'/> </LazyLoad>

You'll have to create a new component that brings in the functionality of both. TooltipButton, TooltipLink, Link, and TooltipRoutedLink. We're starting to get a lot of components to handle a bit of added functionality.

For the tooltip example, if you had a whole bunch of tooltips on different elements, it would be annoying to have different event listeners and "should it be shown" variables for each one.

I'm just pushing on the "is this really a good idea" front

You must: reference each element you are extending using refs or an id add code in your oncreate and ondestroy for each element you are extending, which could become quite a lot if you have a lot of elements needing extension (anchors, form inputs, etc.)

This is where hooks/behaviors are a good idea. They clean up your component code a lot. Also, it helps a ton since you don't get create/destroy events for elements that are inside {{#if}} and {{#each}}. That could become very burdensome to try and add/remove functionality with elements as they are added/removed within a component.

While there is some precedence in other frameworks for using as, the word doesn't fit well. Since you are adding functionality to elements I like the word add better (and it only has 1 more character).

Perhaps at that point we're better off settling on a way to pass components through as parameters? <!-- App.html --> <Outer contents={Inner}/> <!-- Outer.html --> <div> <div>Something</div> <[contents] foo='bar'/> </div>

But some sort of official way to do that in the language would make this nicer - and would mean I would have to worry less about destroying components when their parent is destroyed, which I'm certainly not being vigilant about in my code.

I would hope for it to come with React-like behavior where I could pass in a string (like div or a) and have it show up as a normal div/a element when the child component used it.

On the other hand, we could impose restrictions to the feature in order to avoid these hard paths.

I'll work on a preliminary PR (which I expect will need some love from maintainers, sorry!)

The lack of spread continues to be a big pain for me, adding lots of difficult-to-maintain cruft in my components. Having to maintain a list of all possible attributes that I might ever need to pass through a component is causing me a lot of friction in my most composable components.

Use case: Wrapper components that need to render an element (e.g. because they attach event listeners). You'd probably use a <div> there by default but there may be places where this is not desirable for semantic reasons (e.g. in lists).

const components = { Label, Tree, Menu };