Could you explain what is wrong with the accessibility of this page? All the content is included in the html payload, so it is accessible to screen readers and text-based browsers; and as for the "reveal" effect, it seems to respect user's choice of "prefers reduced motion" and is disabled when that is user's preference.

> The venture-funded open-source ecosystem: total disclosed funding, USD M

> Bars grow as you scroll.

The bars, in fact, don't grow as you scroll. And I don't even see why they should.

Does this mean you will requre all students to pay for a subscription to an llm provider?

This might sound principled, but we need to recognize that school administrators are incentivised to have as few kids as possible fail their exams; and consequently, so are the teachers. Either exams will change, or the teaching will change.

P.S.: The popover description is brilliant:

> The obtrusive newsletter modal every AI startup deploys. Takes over the entire viewport with a blurred backdrop. By design, neither the Escape key nor backdrop clicks close it; the visitor either submits the form inside or clicks the tiny dismissal link at the bottom. Pair with `timer` to auto-open after the visitor has skimmed a few paragraphs.

Where? I couldn't find any link to the source on the website.

What happens after the submission? Who reviews the feature? How long? Are there any limits to the size of the diff? Do reviewers push back? How often are features submitted?

Users don't. Question is, do developers, who are tasked to read, modify, and maintain the code?

He is an individual, and they are a company of about 6,000 people?

How do you mean? Since the render function reruns during every update to state/props, derived/computed values can be calculated from the updated state/props during rendering.

I think people just don't want to bother. They don't want to read the docs, or maybe watch a video or two (back when webpack was popular, Sean Larkin, webpack evangelist, made a number of popular courses about setting it up). Also, webpack config became easier compared to 2014/2015; I think they got to practically a zero-config by default.

I can understand that people don't want to care; but "impossible to reason about" is not it. It isn't rust, for crying out loud; nor lisp; nor haskell.

I suppose we can say that there are different kinds of reactivity. Signals is one kind. Observables à la rxjs is a different kind (the whole model of programming with rxjs was referred to as "functional reactive programming"). Observables are push-based. Signals, as I heard, are a more complex primitive, which, under the hood, is push-pull.

React's reactivity model may be crap; but this doesn't make it non-existent.

> Signals - reactivity

The r in rx stands for reactive.

I haven't. But I found myself, to my surprise, not particularly interested in trying; which makes me wonder what motivates other developers if not peer pressure or demands for more productivity. I find coding interesting and fulfilling enough to do it on my own. I do ask LLMs questions from time to time, but for that, even a chatgpt or a gemini in a browser tab is enough.

The best experience I had so far is with code reviews, when the models pointed out my mistakes. But I haven't yet gotten to the point where I would want them to write code for me.

What I am selfishly curious about is: is it possible to remain a software developer, and ignore AI? To write code the same way we did before 2022? I understand that there are many companies in which managers demand more of workforce — but are there still places where people are satisfied to not rush ahead and do business same way they did three or four years ago?

In other words, is it possible to not battle with AI trying to get it what we want? Were you forced to do this by your employer, or was this entirely self-inflicted?

Asking for a friend.