Also since companies are adding AI to everything, sometimes when you think you're just doing a digital zoom you're actually getting AI upscaling.
There was a court case not long ago where the prosecution wasn't allowed to pinch-to-zoom evidence photos on an iPad for the jury, because the zoom algorithm creates new information that wasn't there.
The dude who owns the election server won’t be able to manipulate results in any way.
Sure he will. He can just ignore votes for one candidate and not add them to the chain. Blockchains are only resistant to manipulation if they're distributed and people agree on the canonical version. Even then if enough people agree to manipulate them they can, like they did with Ethereum.
The most fair thing to do, oddly, is to leave the seat in the opposite position it was when you got there; everybody flips it once, it may be before or after you use it. Fair.
I'll remember this one, I love it when people are actually logical about things.
Reminds me of canal locks. The etiquette is to always close the doors after you leave, and people get angry when you don't. But it's infuriating because it actually creates more work for everyone. If you leave the doors closed then the next person always has to stop their boat to open them, but if you leave them open there's a 50% chance the correct set of doors is open for the next person to sail right in. If you're in the unlucky 50% it makes no difference, because you had to stop to empty the lock anyway and afterwards you get to sail off without closing them.
People also think closing them saves water, which is another can of people-not-understanding-physics worms.
There's a generation of internet debate guys who seem convinced that correlation disproves causation
I always think it's unfair to compare things to video games. Video games are so inefficient they had to invent a separate processor with hundreds of cores just to run them. Of course they end up running well.
If cheap phones had a 128-core JavaScript Processing Unit, websites would probably run fast too.
What happened was, up until the early 2010s a lot of frontend developers were essentially designers who could write HTML/CSS templates, but not programs. When the industry shifted to client side SPAs they couldn't follow, so there was a big backlash against the new "complicated" tooling, even though it's no more complicated than any other domain.
I always wanted to write a response post, "How it feels to learn JavaScript in 1996". Because yes, webpack is harder than flat JS files. But you have 1 billion tutorial videos to help you do it, and open source project skeletons to start you off, and Q&A sites to fix your problems for you.
Some of us learned JS before YouTube or StackOverflow or even W3Schools existed. When I got my first job browsers didn't even have developer tools! If your code didn't work you just had to guess why!
I'm a web dev and yes they could. It's annoying that web devs get blamed for it though, the reason for all the javascript is mostly business decisions out of our control.
Mainly the tracking scripts which the marketing department adds against out will. But also it's a lot cheaper to have a client-rendered web app than a traditional website (with client side rendering you can shut off all your web servers and just keep the api servers, our server side processing went down 90% in the switchover). And it's more efficient for the company to have one team working in one programming language and one framework that can run the backend and frontend, so the frontend ends being a web app even if it's not really necessary.