Once again, this isn’t good or bad, it’s just the most efficient way to create something that is similar to something else

Of all the compile-to-languages, the one that strikes me as having the least merit is JSX. It's basically a ton of added complexity for the sake of what boils down to syntax. There are no real gains in terms of language semantics in JSX.

Other frameworks, which use a template syntax built atop HTML — Svelte, Vue, Ractive, Glimmer etc — have historically been fragmented, meaning those tools need to be reinvented many times.

Every new variation to the view requires updating both the view model and the template. This holds true even for simple variations.

I’d still be interested in Svelte making things easier so I’ve opened a feature request for Reactive statement cleanup functions.

This leads to web developers at every company needing to rebuild every control from scratch. This represents millions of dollars of investment for each company to duplicate work that many other companies are also doing.

Modern view libraries like React allow teams to build and maintain these components more easily than ever before, but it is still extraordinarily difficult to do so in a fully accessible way with interactions that work across many types of devices.

First class TypeScript support means that both of these two systems do a good job of handling TypeScript code.

predicted that over time, effort in the gamified course would be lower than the non-gamified course. The Mauchly's test was notsignificant. Video game use was not a significant covariate. Time was a significant factor,F(2,132)¼28.92,p<.001, partialh2¼.31. For bothconditions, effort increased significantly at each time point. Condition was not a significant factor,F(1, 66)¼.10,p¼.75, partialh2<.01. Theinteraction effect was not significant,F(2, 132)¼1.36,p¼.27, partialh2¼.02.H4was not supported.

These seem to be better reasons to support sub-nanosecond resolution. I think either storing picoseconds or storing sec fraction as 64-bit integer are better approaches than storing a rational. However, either change would be very invasive, and it seems unlikely to be worth the effort.

The app was still stuck in beta testing years after its debut, and the creators had to ignore bug reports and feature requests due to the limited resources.

This policy allows the test suite to stay green while letting individual teams decide when they would like to put in the effort to write more deterministic tests. They may choose to do so right away, or delay until they work on the feature again.

This also ties in the "Single Source Of Truth", where even if I craft descriptive commit messages I will probably have to describe what I did in the MR comments anyways, so that feels like duplicate work.

Good commit hygiene in general is a tough thing to enforce. It requires manual labor and descipline, from both the author and the reviewer.

Other sites could absolutely spend time crawling for new lists of breached passwords and then hashing and comparing against their own. However this is an intensive process and I'm sure both Facebook and Google have a team dedicated to account security with functions like this.

Before embarking on the effort to scrape the web for new password breaches and compare against your entire user database you also need to consider the ROI. The beauty of the pwned passwords API and this, and other, implementations of it is that you can get a good improvement in your account security with comparatively little engineering effort.

But, let’s be pragmatic for a second, the 80/20 rule states that you get 80% of the value from 20% of the work and a couple of simple tests are vastly better than no tests at all. Start small and simple, make sure you get something out of the testing first, then expand the test suite and add more complexity until you feel that you’ve reached the point where more effort spent on realism will not give enough return on your invested time.

This means that teachers spend a lot of time adapting and creating their own materials

ConclusionsThis paper finds that the effort grade affects theknowledge grade positively and significantly across allspecifications. This is strong evidence that more studenteffort does lead to increase learning

Agreementis the good stuff in science; it’s the high fives.But it is easy to think we’re in agreement, when really we’re not. Modeling ourthoughts on heuristics and pictures may be convenient for quick travel down the road,but we’re liable to miss our turnoff at the first mile. The danger is in mistaking ourconvenient conceptualizations for what’s actually there. It is imperative that we havethe ability at any time to ground out in reality.

Lyubomirsky makes the simple but important point that increasing your level of happiness takes sustained effort and commitment over time, just like achieving any other important goal in life.

Research has also shown that the amount of effort someone puts into increasing their happiness has a large effect on whether or not an activity works. In several studies, researchers found that people who reported that they put a lot of effort into their activities saw the greatest gains in well-being. Other methods are also used to evaluate effort, such as how many characters someone writes in his or her gratitude letters.

Streamline helping opportunities to make them seem less costly. After the tragic earthquake and tsunami in Japan, the Red Cross encouraged people to donate $10 by simply texting the term “REDCROSS” to a pre-specified number from their smartphones. By making pro-social behavior as simple and quick as the press of a button, Red Cross was able to increase compassion and helping for many people. These efficient helping opportunities could be embedded into various social media sites—such as Facebook—to provide low-effort conduits for compassion and helping.

But this is only part of the truth. Much intellectual property is produced only after considerable financial investment, whether it be in the research laboratory or in the graduate education of the scientist using the facility.

Responsibility, myself versus others. It may appear that responses to the question of responsibility are bifurcated between "Myself" and all other parties combined. However, respondents who identified themselves as being responsible were more likely than not to identify additional parties that share that responsibility. Thus, curatorial responsibility is seen as a collaborative effort. (The "Nobody" category is a slight misnomer here as it also includes non-responses to this question.)