most camera buyers will in fact never buy a second lens [...] you've just wasted your money on a body that doesn't perform as well as an iPhone because of the cheap kit lens
Probably the strongest argument here. Yes, there are clip-on telephoto lenses for phones; but nothing beats a big piece of quality glass for speciality photography. Even in the low end (e.g. Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM) this will be much more versatile for specialty photography.
Unless you're a pro photog you probably don't care, so want to take photos of your dog? use your phone is also good advice.
Scores are ambiguous ("where exactly did the ball land?"), controversial and contentious, resulting in endless video replays and accusations of biased refs.
Where do the sports without ambiguous, controversial and contentious scores hire their bias-free referees?
No, you're right. What started as a small, humourous concession to the possibility of straight up news falls apart on analysis. But its failure supports my main point pretty well. If sports scores are contentious claims aspiring to the status of fact, then what of wars and elections? The only "fact" is that they are published in newspapers.
I fought (and lost) against this payflow at a job because Marketing guessed that the sunk cost of time spent filling out the CC info form made users more likely to just click "buy" once the final cost was revealed. Stats backed them up :(
This is how stats lie. Success is based on measurements across short time spans because that's the only way to reliably correlate features to behaviors. There's no good way to measure the impact of a bad decision across years or decades, so the dark pattern gets away scot free. The only thing stopping it would be a particularly impactful survey or focus group, or worse yet user outcry.
> in the us maybe you can file complaints with the ftc
As someone with complaints relevant to the FTC... where do I file a complaint with the FTC that falls outside of their website workflow? Their website appears to shoehorn everyone into payment disputes and fraud. But the FTC is supposed to protect consumers from more than just payment disputes and fraud.
Oh man I had a bright metallic green Varsity as a kid. That was a great bike and I really regret getting rid of it, or rather abandoning it at my parent's house when I went off to college, and they got rid of it :(
My impression is that there are two ways to use rails:
1. Your frontend js needs are pretty minimal and you don't want something approaching a single-page app. In this case, you lean into Turbo and Stimulus to have rails do most things for you that would previously have been done with some a heavy-weight react-based frontend.
2. Your frontend js needs are significant and you do want a single-page app. In this case, ignore/disable turbo + stimulus. Instead, build your rails app as just a json API and then have a separate project for your frontend built using a dedicated frontend build tool like vite/CRA/webpack/etc.
On one hand, I feel like the turbo/stimulus stuff is the rails community preferring to pretend that the JS world doesn't exist. On the other hand, maybe it's really just the rails world embracing the above dichotomy: they're tools for doing some light frontend work with no JS, and an acceptance of the fact that if you want an SPA, there are better non-rails tools that you'll wind up using anyway.
My employer fits your first criteria precisely. Turbo and Stimulus provide exactly as much interactivity as we need. The appearance is that we're trying to avoid Javascript. The reality is that we are (successfully) minimizing context switching when working on the code base.
Yeah, the ruby community has a bit of an axe to grind with SPAs. Opinions range from the defensible ("JS is a bit overused, sometimes pure serverside rendering like Rails does is all you need") to the imo-ridiculous ("Pretty much no one needs an SPA and the whole frontend JS world is a passing fad").
We went with esbuild and regardless of speed (it's way faster) the main reason I like it is because the config is tiny and I actually understand what it's doing. Our Webpacker config was big and fragile by comparison.
Why? Material's dead, adding React is adding a massive amount of bloat and build steps.
You need to have a reason to pay the price of React. Otherwise you're just being a sheep.
I say this using React and Material UI in a present project, from my perspective development for what is a pretty simple form UI is massively slowed down by using them.
Could have knocked out the whole site on my own in 1/2 the time using the 'old' stuff.
But now we've got a lovely loading spinner while it downloads everything it needs piecemeal and a bunch of basic browser functionality is broken, we've got 10x the amount of code, have to deal with a whole extra API layer and it's a nightmare to debug sitting there watching network calls instead of being able to step through the code in a proper debugger, brilliant stuff.
Completely worth it for that one datepicker we have.
In my clients company they usually even implement admin crud UI as api + React and it takes them so much longer than just whipping up some forms in Rails. They just do this as a default state of doing things not because they actually need an extra api for anything.
Probably the strongest argument here. Yes, there are clip-on telephoto lenses for phones; but nothing beats a big piece of quality glass for speciality photography. Even in the low end (e.g. Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM) this will be much more versatile for specialty photography.
Unless you're a pro photog you probably don't care, so want to take photos of your dog? use your phone is also good advice.