Boilerplate is bad because it's fundamentally just noise. When you read the code you want to be able to tell what the purpose of the code is and what the problem it solves. Ideally, code should be expressing that as clearly as possible. Having a lot of boilerplate is typically an indication that the language semantics don't allow you to express the solution in a clear way and you have to write a lot of incidental code. The more code you have to read the more cognitive overhead there is in understanding it and keeping it all in your head.
don't let the door hit you on the way out
Maybe the US should tell Israel to stop invading Lebanon instead.
It's too bad that absolutely nothing will be learned from this experience in the west.
I find DRY often turns into an antipattern because decoupling is far more important than code reuse in practice. Having a function that supports many different code paths can make it very brittle because any changes to it need to consider all the possible use cases. However, if you have two separate functions that are similar, but can evolve independently then you don't have that problem. As a rule, it's better to duplicate code first, and then extract parts that turn out to be general purpose functionality once that's identified through usage, and to put that code into libraries.
you already have
I mean to say that people who can't see that the west lost the war against Russia and the obvious repercussions of that for the west will be shocked by what Todd is saying and see it as an aberration.
that's not the colonial way
Turns out that the EU cares about a trade war with China a lot more than the environmental crisis. Why could've guessed.
fuck the USA
Electric cars aren't the solution, but they are a big practical improvement on gas cars, and thus a necessary step in the transition. Getting rid of cars will require major structural changes in society that aren't even on the horizon.