looking at files inside the temp folder … otherwise known as … are you sitting down? You really should sit for this … temp files!

The point OP is making is that those people would not put 2 and 2 together to understand that the files they were looking at are called temp files, just because that’s the folder they found them in. They may not even remember the name of the folder, only that it contains a bunch of files with a prefix they’re now googling.

Not sure why I’m bothering explaining this to you, the way you responded makes you look absolutely insufferable, but maybe someone else who comes across this will find it useful.

It will happen, probably in weeks to months.

in the next few years, like, very few

Now who’s moving the goalposts…?

Foolish me for thinking no-one could possibly need an /s on that comment.

I got the sarcasm, but this particular point is – as you’ve demonstrated very clearly in your response – the actual message you’re trying to push.

Or did you not know that highly addictive amphetamines is a commonly prescribed for ADHD?

You’re using “highly addictive” to insinuate that this is just a ludicrous and fundamentally flawed practice. No concern towards all of those who do have ADHD who report that medication has helped them live a life otherwise inaccessible to them. It’s highly stigmatizing framing and just because you have a valid point about opioids does not mean you get to dismiss genuine mental health struggles as having fallen prey to a marketing scheme.

the real breakthrough has been convincing everyone that they have some sort of mental health issue that requires pharmaceuticals. The entire country is taking something, and that’s been a huge help in keeping people docile.

I was with you up until that point. You point out that the poor are made to fight each other and then you engage in a fight against the disadvantaged who need medical assistance? Fuck this science denying, ableist bullshit.

While at the same time closing all PRs indiscriminately, even the ones that are just trying to update the repo from its decades old JavaScript syntax (and get support in the comments)

Here in Germany everyone I know pronounces the letters individually – as German letters that is, which means the Q is pronounced “coo” rather than “cue”. I don’t mind it, it’s not quite as clunky as in English.

I do say sequel when speaking English though.

Here’s a really small and easy to fix pet peeve of mine: graphics options that cycle through the levels of fidelity with inconsistent scales. I like to set my graphics to max, try it out, and then adjust down where needed. It’s very annoying if a game doesn’t stop where the max option is, so if it’s currently at “High” I have no idea if the next option to the right is going to be “Very High” or “Low” again. So I often end up overshooting the highest setting and having to go back one, or purposefully going to the lowest setting and then one further.

There is an organization called nyob (I think) pushing back against that and going through the courts to have more sites penalized for their violations. The process is slow, but I see more and more pages adopting the required “reject all” so there seems to be some pressure on them.

Where did I say it takes years? I literally said earlier in my response to your very first comment that I think 2 days vs a week can make a big difference in understanding.

Stop arguing against points I never made.

Please point me to where I said that then. Given that my stance is just that it’s not very plausible, I would be very interested to see where I supposedly claimed it wasn’t possible.

How are you saying you “straight up disagree” and then you go on to agree with me that for someone without exceptional experience, 5-6 days is reasonable?

I think there’s a pretty significant difference between a week and 2 days in terms of how much time you had to solidify your understanding.

I also didn’t take that long to pick up the basics, but I could not say that I understood hooks within the first two days of working with React. There are just so many small details and limitations that can catch you by surprise if you don’t know why hooks work the way they do, same with the lifecycle of a component and what triggers a re-render. That does take a few days to fully understand in a way that you can utilize moving forward.

It’s possible that I had a harder time because I was used to manipulating the DOM directly, and so managing all updates through state changes and being strongly discouraged from directly referencing UI elements felt very foreign to me. I don’t think that my stance would change if I had a different experience in the beginning though.

Glossing over the pretentiousness of your comment

And your stance of “I can learn x in two days, so how can people say it takes longer to learn y” isn’t pretentious?

When do you consider someone’s “mental model” “appropriate”?

“appropriate” isn’t a quantification of the mental model in itself, I am using the word as “having a mental model that is appropriate to the thing being learned”. A different mental model is required for React than working with vanilla JS and manipulating the DOM directly, so the mental model for one isn’t appropriate for the other.

And yes, a mental model is quantifiable, to the extent that it accurately predicts what consequences design and implementation decisions may have on the behavior of the system.

How do you know what is similar in complexity to React? As far as I can tell you aren’t familiar with it.

at least at a base level while you google how to do everything else

Ah, there’s the problem. Your definition of learning doesn’t include having an appropriate mental model, which is key to actually retaining and internalizing the way it works. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that is a prerequisite for claiming to have “learned” something like a language or framework.

A textbook example of the original meaning of Dunning-Kruger, wherein an inexperienced person is unaware of what they have yet to learn and thus overestimate their existing skills.

React, Vue, Solid, … are a lot more complex than your average JavaScript library, because they contain so many abstractions and basically require a separate “way of thinking” in addition to what you know from JS itself. There’s a separate state and UI model, hooks are a foreign concept at first, and component memoization and re-rendering takes some getting used to as well.

Now, I only have two years of experience with React, but ten in JavaScript overall, and I will say that using React/JSX required the biggest “mental model shift” for me. That’s not to say that it’s difficult to work with or particularly hard to learn, but it takes time to understand and really internalize this language-within-a-language library.

The way you’re asking that question seems to imply that because the API of some Python libraries can be learned in two days, the same must be possible for React, and that seems rather dismissive.

For a second I thought you were calling sea water a dangerous gas.