These are two completely different things.
One thing is solving the problem for the world as a whole. That’s the ideal scenario, the one we should aim for. It might get resolved, it might not, but it will definitely take a good amount of time, maybe a very long time.
The other issue is your personal situation.
If you're living in a country with intense conflict or in a war zone, you can’t just try to survive for 40 years while “waiting” for the country to make progress. You move, and that’s it.
Plus, given that people’s freedom is constantly increasing, and they have more and more options available, expecting that everyone will autonomously choose a healthy lifestyle is like waiting for Santa Claus—unless you plan to take that freedom away from them.
I could certainly be wrong, but that doesn't seem to be the case to me.
When you completely separate routines from the data, you end up coupling the code that calls the routine with the data it’s passing. I don’t see how it would be possible to maintain that level of separation while achieving the same level of isolation that’s possible with objects, where it’s possible to truly know nothing about the data in a given interaction.
I’m referring here to the purest aspect, in terms of pure functions.
At some point, the data has to come from an impure source, and honestly, I don’t see why a closure would be better than an object—practically, they’re the same thing.
Well said. I think the issue stems from the same point.
Both cases assume that individuals are being coerced out of their potential to transform the world for the better, whether by Big Brother or by TikTok. In my view, both stem from an assumption that I don’t see playing out in the real world: that all individuals have the desire or capacity to make a difference and be something "more".
I think this idea came from the Enlightenment. That’s when we started to forget that, unfortunately, the overwhelming majority are just here to occupy space.
At what point did this become a valid and legitimate issue?
Why do we feel the need to prefer or not prefer what others do with their time? Isn’t that something that concerns only the person and their own life, which really shouldn’t concern us at all?
I think your point really highlights this ethical mindset that has become so prominent today, especially with the rise of the internet.
They did not mean 'prefer' in the way you interpret it. They mean 'I believe the world would be better if...' rather than 'I'd choose for others to behave like...'
The benchmark has to be read with some knowledge. For example Plaintext is given you an indicator how good the runtime and the HTTP stack is. JSON goes one step further and gives you the comparison with common REST APIs including JSON serialization. One step further is then there is Fortune which also includes some DB layer and should representative for applications.
However, also check the definition of the rows. With Plaintext there are 3-10 entries for ASP.NET Core with different level of comfort (from "do not do that at home", to express like middlewares to "rails like MVC")
techempower is the go to web framework benchmark suite. it is of course gamed heavily. c# does as well as any garbage collected framework, half as fast as the best rust/c++ ones
