- I recently read that most programmers SQL knowledge is outdated by 20 years and it’s true for me. There are quite a lot of features in most DBs that feel very "new" to me.

- Comparing SQL to React weakens the argument. SQL is the language, React is a piece of software. You certainly can run 30 year old JS today in modern browsers.

.well-known/security is listed as a prominent example, but is not in the well-known category.

Useful reference https://securitytxt.org/

Though some sites drop it at the root /security.txt instead of /.well-known/security.txt

Note, invites beg bounties spam.

It's in the "Security" category. I guess whatever categorization scheme they're using doesn't allow assigning multiple categories per item.

And yet, no native select + search combined, which is a very common kind of list. The datalist is basically unusable, because you don't know any of the options.

and it is not styleable

The worst part is that it’s impossible to tell if the author has just "improved" a correct article to add hyperbole or if the whole thing is hallucinated and all explanations are kinda wrong.

When I started game programming, I thought that game programming means manipulating pixels on a screen. Took a while to understand that the stuff you see is just a representation of the game state in memory. The whole game could run in memory only without any render logic and would still work. That's what game servers do.

Not a lawyer, but pretty sure shit like that doesn’t fly in the EU.

Nice idea. Small thing: the categories are pretty much fixed. If you have to abbreviate a never-changing category like "Consumer Defen..." in a widget, your design doesn't work in this aspect.

Thanks for the feedback

The 5% who use it love it 95%?

> It's viewing the situation through the lens of Anglo capitalist opinions.

Came here to say this. It's a very narrow perspective that shows in sub headlines like "Kinship societies are wealth-destroying societies".

One could also take the lens of "Kinship societies are making people's wealth more equal to reduce competition and jealousy, increase harmony and happiness" – although I have no data whether these people are genuinely more happy. It quotes some business-oriented Ghanians who seem quite unhappy about sharing their wealth. And yet, the perspective of indivual wealth over group wealth is assumed and never critically reflected upon.

I'm not saying that their way is better or something like that. I just think that reading the article is a good exercise in reflecting on one's own views on life and wealth.