You jest, but it took forever to add somewhat intuitive layout mechanism to css which allowed you to do what could be done easily with html tables. Vertically centering a div inside another was really hard, and very few people understood the techniques you would use, instead of blindly copying them.
It was beyond irony that the recommended solution was to tell the browser to render your divs as a table.
As a lesson to other government funded entities about the power of government and to please voters who are easily manipulated with mere accusations that align with long held unproven beliefs
I built a protein comparison site (aggregating nutrition, ingredients, electrolytes, prices) and I expected a little bit of traffic, but I'm getting less than a single visitor every 2 days from google. It's absolutely dead.
A year ago I threw together a tiny little site with some datamined assets from a game (deadlock) that randomly got indexed and saw a couple hundred visits a month from google.
> They didn't know what they were doing _and still went through with it_
You don't know what you don't know; sometimes people can think they do know what they're doing and they just haven't encountered situations otherwise. We were all new to programming once; no one would ever become a solid engineer if they prevented themselves from building anything out of fear of doing something wrong that they did not account for out of lack of experience.
This is where the 'unknown unknowns' quote comes in useful. I don't know anything about blockchain technology, but I know that I don't know anything about it. When you make software which involves handling people's information your first thought should be 'do I know all I need to know about handling this information properly?', and your second thought should be 'do I really know all I need to know about handling this information properly?'.
> What is the purpose of laws if they are willfully ignored?
Nearly every liberty we take for granted was at one point against the law or gained through willful lawbreaking. A healthy society should be tolerant of some bending of the rules.
I agree with you. A quick search suggests that there are 11 million undocumented people in the United States, or about 3% of the population. A healthy society does not harbor 11 million people without documentation so they can be exploited by employers for cheap labor, not given proper health care and labor rights.
Yet it's interesting how we put the blame and punishment on the people being taken advantage of, and not the employers who are exploiting them. If both parties are breaking the law shouldn't we at the very least ensure that the business owner who is exploiting any number of workers is held to the same standard as an undocumented person whose only crime was not having the proper paperwork?
I don't blame them. If I were them, I would do the same thing. However, as someone with the ability to vote and influence (to a very small degree) public policy, I would prefer we move toward a system in which strong labor rights exist in this country, and this is simply impossible in an environment in which employers are free to hire labor off the books for "pennies". To be clear, I think both political parties in the US are terrible, and all of this debate serves the interests of the employers that benefit from this situation.
Because it would hurt our little elitist exceptionalist hearts if we gave an H1B to a construction worker. There are low wage industries that could use such a program, but our little hearts can't take it because "its not the best and brightest".
Right - more risk of deportations pushes them under ground and allows easier exploitation, like employers who can hold this status over their head.
People who have productively worked in the country and either paid taxes or contribute to the economy for some years should be offered pathways to naturalization or at least work visas and real legal protection.
Is the number really that crazy if we consider the context?
- America is a land of opportunities. It is BY FAR the country with the largest number of legal immigrants[0]. There are ~51M in the US and the second is Germany with ~16M. I think it makes sense that given the extremely high demand to come to the US, it is unsurprising that many do so illegally. Especially when the costs of staying in your own country are so high.
- How would you even go about documenting them, determining status, and then following due process[1]. Tricky situation. It's does not only create a dystopian authoritarian hellscape to constantly check everyone's status, but it is also really expensive to do so! Random stops interfere with average citizens and violates our constitutional rights. Rights created explicitly because the people founding this country were experienced with such situations...
I mean I also agree with your point that they are being exploited and that there's been this silent quid pro quo (even if one party is getting the shit end of the deal). But also I think people really need to consider what it actually takes to get the things they want. Certainly we can do better and certainly we shouldn't exploit them. But importantly, which is more important: the rights of a citizen or punishing illegal immigrants? There has to be a balance because these are coupled. For one, I'm with Jefferson, I'd rather a hundred guilty men go free than a single innocent be stripped of their freedom. You can't pick and choose. The rules have to apply to everyone or they apply to no one. There are always costs, and the most deadly costs are those that are hard to see.
[1] I cannot stress enough how critical due process is. If we aren't going to have due process, then we don't have any laws. Full stop. If we don't have due process, then the only law is your second amendment right, and that's not what anyone wants.
> A healthy society should be tolerant of some bending of the rules.
No rule can be so well written that it covers all possible exceptions. Programmers of all people should be abundantly aware of this fact. We deal with it every single day. But I do mean fact, it is mathematically rigorous.
So even without a direct expansion of rights and the natural progression of societies to change over time, we have to at minimum recognize that there is a distinction between "what the rule says" and "what the intended rule is". This is like alignment 101.
The comments here all suggesting different arcane and complicated stacks of different devops solutions and certificates and configurations and services has me somewhat despairing that such a COMMON usecase is still so annoyingly obtuse.
