What do you mean by that? They both work out to the same thing just with a different syntax.

TIOBE basically searches a bunch of search engines and other things for "$LANGUAGE programming", applies some magical fudge factor and calls that a result.

It's absolute nonsense. It's highly manipulable if you can convince people to use the " programming" wording. It's going to be highly affected by the appearance and disappearance of documentation websites. It will of course still pick up ancient archives of stuff that nobody is actually using today.

I have an extreme skepticism of that VB is anywhere near the top 10. The original VB died long, long ago. VB.NET wasn't backwards compatible in the slightest and I don't think it ever had much adoption, because what's even the point? You might as well use C# instead. In fact long ago I had a VB project I considered transitioning to VB.NET and quickly decided it wasn't worth it, and went with C#. That was somewhere in the early 2000s, and I don't think it's gotten any more appealing since.

TIOBE is still nonsense of the highest order, not sure why anyone bothers using it.

It's some search engine counts based voodoo. Maybe not the most terrible metric possible, but I have no idea why it's the one always being discussed when there's better things one could measure at this point. Like say, GitHub.

If we want to know what's currently most popular, what we should want is measuring the actual usage. That might be projects, or commits, depending.

I never understood Mozilla's foray into AI.

There's just nothing about Mozilla that suggests to me they are experts on the subject matter and have much to contribute in the area. I could be wrong, but Mozilla is so tightly associated to the web that it just was a hard sell to me that their AI efforts were going to go anywhere from the start.

But if I tell an LLM "Thanks that suggestion worked" that feedback is lost to the void. There's no upvoting, no storage that I know of applying to all other questions people ask to let the system know "yes that answer worked particularly well". So all the LLMs can go on giving out the same answers forever not really knowing they are flawed... unless someone publishes an article about it.

There's no reason why LLMs can't have feedback mechanisms. In fact they do. ChatGPT has thumbs up and thumbs down buttons. It almost definitely tracks usage of download and copy to clipboard buttons.

I mean on the low end.

Like formerly a small business would pay for the valuable HTML and FTP knowledge, but today many will just use Wix instead.

And more complex things are more proper webdev and not just knowing some HTML tags.

I remember there was a short time when the web was new and "webmaster" was a profitable occupation. Then a combination of improved web design software, CMSes, frameworks and the like quickly ate the low end, and the higher end just got rolled into software development.

I'm not sure why anyone thought that knowing what keywords a specific model recognizes best could ever be an enduring form of employment. To me it was always clearly extremely temporary.

Amazingly, ISA disappeared much later than I thought. It seems there's a Skylake motherboard with an ISA slot out there. That architecture was only discontinued by intel 6 years ago.

Also, I believe the bus still internally survives in many boards that don't have a physical connector, and the LPC bus is ISA in a slightly newer form.

No, this countermeasure isn't going to do anything useful. Any web spider is going to run into thousands of these, and therefore already is going to be coded to tolerate it fine.

These countermeasures were made to trip up worms and naively coded Perl scripts used by mom and pop spamming operations. That is useful to an extent, but isn't going to do absolutely anything against the bigger players.

All you have to do is to keep track of stats like depth and performance, notice that a branch is doing badly, and prune it off.

Eesh.

This is an ancient idea. Probably discussed at length right here in the 2000s. No crawler worth its salt is going to even notice this.

Like oh, this:

https://it.slashdot.org/story/...

or this:

https://developers.slashdot.or...

I really liked the older XPS 13. Light, powerful, great Linux support. Smashed the screen on that, figured okay, I'll get the new one, the XPS 13 Plus. I want more RAM anyway.

It's gone downhill. Two USB C ports instead of 3. Worse touchpad (previous was clicky, this one seems to have some sort of embedded haptic device that one day just stopped working and no physical mouse button keys). Function keys and most importantly ESC key are now a touch surface instead of physical keys.

Hardware-wise it's still nice to use, but otherwise a disappointment. I'll be way more careful with picking the next one.

Popeye's great, and they're still making the comic strip. Nancy's gotten pretty good again. Little Orphan Annie eventually got canceled, but man, it was just insane after around 2000 or so.

Patents keep getting longer too. They used to be 14 years long, and now they're 20.

My proposal has been requiring authors to take affirmative steps to get a copyright (it's not automatic or free, though the fee is nominal), so that we only have to worry about the works the author specifically wants to protect, and that the terms would be 1-year with renewals. The number of renewals would depend on the type of work, but in no event would be all that long.

There was a study some years ago that suggested that 15 years was optimal in general. I'd like to see more investigation of that.

Strong disagree. First, life terms are too unpredictable (and might be shorter than fixed or renewable terms of years). Second, part of the goal of copyright is to encourage the creation of unauthorized derivative works; that's why we have limited terms to begin with.

If an author writes a series of books over years in a common setting, with common characters, the first one entering the public domain only opens up the setting and characters as they were in the first book; third party authors can fork it -- instead of the character of John Smith remaining in Everytown USA on his farm, which was what the original author kept writing about, the new unauthorized one has him set out on magic spy adventures in space. The market can sort out whether this is popular or successful.

This sort of thing has worked out okay before. The Aeneid is just the pro-Trojan, pro-Roman fanfic sequel to the Iliad. (Virgil: "Turns out some of the Trojans survived the war and escaped and had crazy adventures! Let's follow them instead of continuing with Odysseus or Agamemnon.")

No, it's not. This is, no pun intended, patently obvious -- look at all of the unsuccessful artists out there, who will never be successful by virtue of their art even if the copyright lasted a billion years.

Copyright gives people a shot at success, but ensures nothing. Most works are, with regard to copyright-derived income, total flops. Most artists don't get reasonably paid from their copyrights.

It's a lot more like a lottery ticket; lots of people try their luck, and all but a handful lose. The tiny number of big winners, combined with the poor math skills of the average artist or gambler, result in people trying again and again and again, almost always fruitlessly.

But as a side effect, our culture gets enriched with all of this art. Maybe not much, if it's bad, but the only way to get more good art is to have more art created period.

I agree that it should vary, probably by medium. Different media have different viable commercial lifetimes, ranging from less than a full day, in the case of a daily newspaper, to usually no more than a couple of decades (and possibly less, now) in the case of TV and movies. On the other hand, I don't think we need guaranteed minimums at all. If an author wants a copyright, let them apply for it -- by as simple a means as possible, but still requiring an affirmative act and the payment of a token sum, such as $1, so that they have to put in at least a little thought. In many cases, the author won't bother, in which case, why should we be putting a copyright on it anyway?