Integration tests can be just as bad in this regard. They can be flakey and take hours, give you a false sense of security and not even address the complexity of the business domain.

I've seen people argue against unit tests because they force you to decompose your system into discrete pieces. I hope that's not the core concern here becuase a well decomposed system is easier to maintain and extend as well as write unit tests for.

Executive leadership compensation tends to be based on, - the size/prospects/complexity of the company - the compensation received by executives in similar roles at other companies - the amount/type of oversight by the board

This incentivizes executives to increase the complexity of their role in order to justify greater remuneration. The classic example is turning a widget factory into a widget financial services provider. In this case, by behaving like Silicon Valley companies chasing the latest fad the executive leadership of Mozilla get to demand the same remuneration packages.

The Mozilla Foundation is funded by donors not investors. The fiduciary duties of non-profit directors do not have to include using the least amount of costs possible.

The Mozilla Foundation's stated goals are "to advance the vision of the future of the internet and technology".

You might reasonably argue that this means copy catting every other product by slapping AI on itself, but I would counter that this actually demonstrates a lack of vision.

mozilla is a non-profit so doesn't need to respond to market signals.

it would do a lot more and a lot more sustainably if it focused on the core mission of its browser.

but these costly "big swings" justify outrageous compensation packages for its executives and so it lets its browser wither.

Ideally there are are legal avenues for redress in your situation. If there are not, that is more likely to be the problem than a conspiracy of propaganda.

I see hope in the Patreon model. I don't mind paying a monthly subscription for a specific show if I get a locked down RSS link.

I can imagine how the password sharing would be a problem tho.

H1B might not meet the legal definition of modern slavery even though many are trapped just as effectively by the system but everyone in evolved with employing them is morally compromised just the same.

How would we tell the difference?

TLDR; it didn't look like it would impact effect systems much at all and most of the benefits (initially) are to make imperative code more performant. So I guess it closes the performance gap somewhat which is good, but won't be a big deal to anyone already using their own concurrency construct.

I don't consider well north of $100billion and climbing to be a pittance.

> We could, and imo we should, give Ukraine to means to win.

And yet we haven't. The Ukrainians are still rationing artillery fire, appear to have lost most of their air defence cover and long ago lost air cover.

If we were serious about winning the US government would have switched to a planned economy (as we did in WW2), taken control of munitions production and gotten a handle on our out of control military contract padding.

> But I would say there is a calculation going on the US about stringing out the war longer

That's certainly one way to spin trying to lose more slowly.

> Also what outcome do you want? We surely don't want Russia to win this and think its great and start more wars and repress more people. I think we should care at least.

a negotiated peace. Tricky given all of the times the US has betrayed Russian trust over the last ten years. The only plausible route feels like a massive neutral DMZ (probably everything east of the Dnipro) administered by a BRICS led UN peace keeping force.

Hugely embarrassing for the West and NATO, but would end the killing and devastation and allow us to concentrate on the real threat of climate change.

It's possible there's a secret plan which will turn things around, but it seems more likely that the only thing which benefits from our inevitable defeat is the arms industry.