Well, auto looks just like var in that regard.

It really isn't. Neither in C# nor in Java. They are just syntactic sugar to avoid redundant type specifications. I mean things like Foo foo = new Foo();. Who gets confused with that?

Why do you think IDEs are able to tell which type a variable is?

Even C# takes a step further and allows developer to omit the constructor with their target-typed new expressions. No one is whining about dynamic types just because the language let's you instantiate an object with Foo foo = new();.

He’s not being run out of the project… yet.

To be honest, to me this all sounds like sociopath behavior to throw politically-inconvenient people under the bus in desperate self-preservation, and hoping this would intimidate anyone falling out of line.

Everyone in that group should present their immediate resignation. Shameful.

I'm inclined to interpret monorepos as an anti-pattern intended to mask away fundamental problems in the way an organization structures it's releases and dependency management.

It all boils down to being an artificial versioning constraint at the expense of autonomy and developer experience.

Huge multinationals don't have a problem in organizing all their projects as independent (and sometimes multiple) source code repositories per project. What's wrong with these small one-bus software shops that fail to do that when they operate at a scale that's orders of magnitude smaller?

So how fucked am I for starting to learn cpp as my first language, or is this a later down the road thing to worry about?

I don't see why you should be concerned, except that no professional software developer is limited to use one specific programming language.

Even if you pay attention to the disaster prophets in the crowd, which are mainly comprised of fanboys implicitly and explicitly promoting their pet language/frameworks, C++ dominates all aspects of the computing ecosystem, which means that in the very least the whole world needs to maintain existing C++ projects to continue to work. See COBOL for reference.

Perhaps I'm being dense and coffee hasn't kicked in yet, but I fail to see where is this new computing paradigm that's mentioned in the title.

From their inception, computers have been used to plug in sensors, collect their values, and use them to compute stuff and things. For decades each and every single consumer-grade laptop has adaptive active cooling, which means spinning fans and throttling down CPUs when sensors report values over a threshold. One of the most basic aspects of programming is checking if a memory allocation was successful, and otherwise handle an out-of-memory scenario. Updating app states when network connections go up or down is also a very basic feature. Concepts like retries, jitter, exponential back off have become basic features provided by dedicated modules. From the start Docker provided support for health checks, which is basically am endpoint designed to be probed periodically. There are also canary tests to check if services are reachable and usable.

These exist for decades. This stuff has been done in production software since the 90s.

Where's the novelty?

(...) there’s really nothing here for any competent programmer, even a fresh graduate. It turns out they they update the software by sending the update by radio.

How they send the payload is hardly the hard part of applying a software update. The hard part is stuff that you need to do after you have the payload: ensure the payload is valid, have the infrastructure in place to roll it out without bricking the hardware, be able to roll back faulty changes if some problem occurs after rolling stuff out, etc.

I can tell you with absolute certainty that this stuff is challenging for the majority of competent programmers out there, and they have the luxury of falling back to telling users to reboot or reinstall the app.

Github for organizations becomes rather expensive rather quickly (...)

I'm not sure if that's relevant. GitHub's free plan also supports GitHub organizations, and GitHub's Team plan costs only around $4/(developer*month). You can do the math to check how many developers you'd have to register in a GitHub Team plan to match the operational expense of hiring a person to manage a self-hosted instance from 9-to-5.

So, from a decentralised solution to the world’s biggest repository

You need to check your notes. Git is decentralized, even if you host a repository somewhere.

Decisions like these (...)

As a Firefox user, these initiatives matter nothing in my decision to use Firefox. In fact, I'm glad they went this way. They need to focus on working on code instead of wasting their time with irrelevant details.

I think you’re missing the point. It’s exactly cause Microsoft created it that people get worried about it.

I don't think there is any merit to that concern. Not only is TypeScript FLOSS, Microsoft also has an excellent track record developing high-quality programming languages and tech stacks. Take for example C#. It's been around for over two decades and if anything it's getting better by the release.

I understand the rationale behind the concern, but there is also a factor of mindlessly parroting cliches.

This submission isn't exactly on-topic, but I presume it will spark some interest among some of the readers.

I was expecting a huge CICD pipeline with delivery steps automatically publishing packages for Debian Unstable and Debian Testing, but it turns out it's a relatively simple pipeline with straight-forward build and testing stages.

Less is definitely more, and targeting Debian alone does greatly simplify a pipeline, but somehow I was expecting more automation taking care of the whole workflow.

This was the first time I saw someone refer to Python's type hints as a performance tool. Up until now, I only saw references to type hints as a way to help static code analyzer tools verify that objects and invocations comply with contracts.

I guess that having additional info at hand to determine how some calls are expected to be made is helpful to gather info to drive optimization steps, but PEP 484 is clear in stating that it's goal is to help type checkers, and that code generation using type hints might be limited to some contexts.

This sounds like yet another example supporting the old law of interfaces, where all it takes for an interface to be abused is for it to exist.