When HTML web components are fully supported in all browsers, it'll be possible to create custom markup elements to extend HTML to include custom DSLs (Domain Specific Languages).

I already have a library (ng2-markdown) that provides a template tag that can parse markdown (incl syntax highlighting) in the same manner that the script tag can parse javascript.

If a parser is already available in javascript, it's not exceedingly difficult to create new HTML elements.

In my experience, it's usually poor management looking to cover their own ass when deadlines are missed and/or establishing a track record so if they need to fire people they have a legally justifiable reason.

Homosexuals and transgendered people are still too 'bleeding' edge to be classified as a 'protected' class. Give it 10 years and they likely will be.

It's not necessarily the fault of the ruling family (although the ruling family may be sympathetic to the cause) but the propagation of Islamic fundamentalist dogma has become an international problem leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents. If SA wants to remain in good standing with the rest of the world the ruling family will need to take action or suffer the consequences.

You don't win an ideological war by going after suicide bombers, you starve and alienate the few Developing and broadcasting the message to the impressionable youth.

SA shit the bed and they were previously given a 'free pass' because their control over oil supply. Meanwhile the US has dramatically shifted the energy production landscape where SA's dominant position is no longer a serious threat.

What was previously their greatest strength is now their greatest weakness. They're stuck between a rock and a hard place. Acknowledge that violence motivated by religious dogma is unacceptable and take action to fight it, or watch their enemies grow stronger each passing day with growing support from the West.

Reduced to childhood terms, they're the kids on a playground playing doctor. Yet, as adults we treat people who play doctor with equal or higher regard than those who actually are doctors.

It's pretty idiotic but we all tend to attribute image as a viable replacement for substance.

South Park just points out the ridiculousness of it all by poking fun at those who take their image too seriously or make a mockery out of their status as a public figure.

Rape is about power. Power conceded by the victims and forcefully taken by the attackers.

A rape joke could make fun of how, useless, sad, an worthless a person would have to be to force themself on others.

How the act itself is nothing but a pathetic act of desperation.

Use perspective, artful storytelling, crafty dialog/writing to take the power from the attackers. Face the fear behind their actions and reduce it to reality; that rape is a sad, terrible, pathetic thing to do to somebody.

Take away the power from fear and gove it back to the victims in the form of empathy and support.

The 'sacred cows' as you say aren't just topics with shock value. They're topics that people are afraid of. Whether because they're taboo, morrally wrong, or legitimately terrifying.

Some may say that the victims suffer more due to living dealing with the shame and lying to loved ones to keep their past a secret.

In the right hands a truly talented comedian could make a great rape joke that is actually empowering to rape victims. One that makes the topic less taboo and helps victims feel less shame in a past that they had no power to shape.

Tasteless humor is noyhing but an ad-hominem dressed up with a fancy delivery. Good comedians don't attack people, they shine light on the ridiculousness of life and in doing so bring people together.

Some people value being 'right' more than they value being happy. Some have an agenda or hidden motivation to talk down to others.

As long as there's an advantage to be gained from it there will always be individuals who bully others. Old school bullying has been replaced with 'moral' grandstanding and public shaming.

We used to teach kids, "sticks and stones will break my bones but words can never hurt me." At some point, that tradition was abandoned and some individuals shifted to assume the stance of 'perpetually offended' so they have a justifiable platform to attack others.

Laughter is also a common social signal, it signals safety and increases happiness for all who join in. Dark jokes specifically, increase our threshold to face terrible things and help distract from the anxiety of -- otherwise -- trivial matters in out day-to-day lives. It increases empathy and connectedness among people, even strangers who have little or nothing in common.

Just look how Austin Powers uses puns to lighten the situation. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3wafhDIMU6w. It's cheesy and over-the-top to match the character but the effect is the same. We joke about the things that make us uncomfortable because it makes us feel better.

The only people up-in-arms about dark humor are individuals seeking to use their own false sense of moral superiority to subjugate others.

In a way, I'd be more scared of somebody who can't find it in themselves to laugh at all. To laugh at an awful joke requires self awareness and a clear understanding of the separation of truth from reality. People who lack those characteristics lie to themselves as much as others and live to project an 'ideal' image of themselves rather than face the humility of accepting their own weaknesses. Whet her the reason is big or small, they project a facade because they have something to hide. Is the person secretly a 'political activist' with an agenda or a murderous psychopath a hair-trigger response away from going off the deep end?

Of the dark comedians, Doug Stanhope is one of the darkest. Just watch the following skit https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hY3W9Z4bdS8. It's a clear middle finger to the 'Breast Cancer Awareness' movement for distracting from one of the few things in life that he truly enjoys. Not only is it extremely shocking but it artfully shines light on the ridiculous hypocracy of a movement that is more marketing than substance.

As shocking as his comedy usually is it's surprisingly endearing and disarming. Look past thr 'bitter old guy' image and it's hard not to see an intelligent young idealist who gave up one day and said, "fuck it, I'm going to ride out this existence until the wheels fall off."

BTW, the dead baby joke the author didn't have the courage to share was, "how do you get a dead baby out of a blender... with a spoon."

In short, don't feel bad about laughing at terrible jokes but be on guard when it comes to those who can't find it in themselves to join you.

I am the author of a handful of OSS libs, one of which is very popular. Of the 500k+ downloads; not including repo clones, package manager installs, etc I can count the number of contributors other than myself on one hand.

Considering the relatively recent migration over from Google Code the number of stars it has is under 100. From the users I've interacted with, I would be shocked to find that even a small fraction of them understand how it works.

From the 4 contributors, except for one useful bugfix (that introduced another bug), their impact has been mostly insignificant.

At one point, one impatient dev requesting a fix forked and atrempted to assume ownership of the project. But that dev disappeared soon after and just left more work for me to clean up after.

So, do tell. Aside from marketing the hell out of it on blogs and referencing it on SO by answering relevant questions, where do I go to find other passionate OSS devs to help support my project.

It's easy to find contributors on projects that require only general knowledge, such as building a website or creating collections of links.

For anything that requires even a little specialized knowledge, it's difficult borderlining on impossible to find help.

I don't need contributors with specialized knowledge. I need contributors who can provide more working examples, better documentation, and can improve the tests.

Ad of most jobs don't already put too mich emphasis on mindlessly coding reference implementations of naive classical algorithms and data structures as proof of competence.

Encouraging inexperienced devs to embrace NIH (Not Invented Here) Syndrome is not the answer.

Even poorly supported open source projects will often have better edge case coverage, testing, and battle hardened code than a prototype produced by a reasonably experienced dev alone could provide.

The issue isn't whether or not to embrace third-party libraries. Thr issue that it's very hard to get devs to join/support existing open source libs.

As a dev of multiple libs, one of which is widely used among the JS community, it's very difficult to promote my lob and draw more users/support. Despite the fact that the lib has been battle hardened, tested, and in common use by hundreds of thousands of other devs for over 4 years.

Somebody could easily create a framework specific wrapper of my lib that garners more stars/forks on GitHub in a matter of months; and worse, most wrapper/clones never bother to update from upstream so their users are left using old/outdated code.

If you want to stick to 'old values' then do the work to make existing libraries better. Don't waste time/resources producing one-off garbage that contributes to technical debt.

Not sure if you got the memo but the one distinctive benefit of employing software developers is that we provide the ability to automate away repetitive work and save the business money in the long-term. Including, saving development time, effort, and future maintenance by leveraging existing bodies of work.

Where the code comes from and how it works Is only relevant to software devs. The everybody else, the only thing that matters is the result it produces and how costly it'll be to maintain and update in the future.

The sad truth for devs who pride themselves on a strong knowledge of algos and data structures is, most jobs don't require those skills. Software produced for profit requires mostly composing an application of existing code, not writing original implementations.

The interests of farmers (ie produce more yield/mass that is impacted less by weeds/pests) do not match the interests of consumers (ie purchase healthy/tasty food with no unforseen side-effects).

Considering the turnaround time between the time a seed is purchased and when the resulting food is consumed, the 'testing period' of newly introduced GMO breeds is very long compared to software iterations.

At the very least, consumers should be able to trace what GMO breed they're consuming and where it was produced. That way, if there are any unforseen side effects, it'll be easier to trace the source.

Just look at the fallout caused by pistachio yields that have been contaminated with E Coli and Salmonella. The long shelf life of nuts means that contaminated foods could still be sitting on store shelves years later.

I'm all for GMO foods if it improves farming effectiveness but the process needs something similar to version control to track quality and a way to clearly indicate GMO foods so people can opt out of beta testing new breeds.

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the internal components are mostly the same between models.

Inkjet is only reliable if the printer is used and calibrated regularly. Even large scale plotters are switching to solid ink (ie wax ball).

This is largely a 'solved' problem but most consumers will still gravitate toward lower price tags and purchase cheap throwaway inkjet printers.

Small company is granted preferential treatment on the contract reward because the company fits under a 'special class'. For example SDVOSB.

The company doesn't actually have the skill/ability to fulfill the contract requirements so they outsource a significant portion of the work; either by picking up one of the bidders who lost as a subprime or bynoutsourcing to a third-party. Passing off the responsibility violates the 'protected class' certification threshold but there's no oversight to verify compliance so the contractor is never held accountable.

Many/most small business defense contractors are simply administrative companies that work the 'special class' certification process, pocket a significant percentage of the funds, and either outsource most of the actual work or hire people and provide substandard pay and provide little/no resources to do the work.

Source: I used to work for one such company. Never again...

The HTML5 part was very appealing to me because I wanted to build a client-side tool to load/save/edit database imports/exports.

It unlocks a lot of potential for fully-featured client-side applications that work more like desktop apps.

The bad part about it is, browser vendors, specifically MS, have been dragging their feet when it comes to fully supporting the File APIs.

Either way, why do 2 data format transforms as one lib? It makes more sense to parse JSON into memory in one step then format it as CSV in a separate step.

Ie, what about the 'Single Responsibility Principle'?

It quickly became clear to me that they intended and succeesed at effectively creating a profit-making skinner box for humans.

Who knew the HS psychology class where we trained a rat to pull a bar for sugar water would later act as an innoculation for lousy games that manipulate their users via classical conditioning methods.

It's sad really because the Blizzard classics (IE Diablo 1/2, Starcraft, Warcraft 1/2) represent the pinnacle of visual storytelling in games.

Unfortunately, libs that provide function chaining via dynamically extwnding a prototype can't be optimized by tree shaking.

The future :: function bind operator should provide a tree shaker friendly alternative.

As much as politicians want tomtreat programming as the 'new literacy' i can think of no better strategy to destroy an entire generation's intrinsic passion to learn technology.

Not to mention, the vast majority of teachers are woefully incapable of effectively teaching a subject they they, themselves don't begin to grasp.

There's no money in teaching so those with the background required to be 'good' teachers will inevitably pursue other, better opportunities.