Nope, far from it. But if it helps you carry on being arrogant you're free to believe it if you like.

I did have a longer post that this answering some of your other points but since you have just gone though all my posts replying to them all seperately I am convinced you are just a troll or something now.

Did you look at any?

Compare:

$('body').append('<div>A div with content</div>');

With:

var newDiv = document.createElement("div");
var newContent = document.createTextNode("A div with content");
newDiv.appendChild(newContent);
document.body.appendChild(newDiv);

Whatever else you may say you cannot possibly miss that jquery let you do the same thing but with far few characters being typed.

Granted Jquery does let you make a mess, but I gather from your sig that you are not a fan of OOP so you are pretty much guaranteed to hate it in that case. You can write beautiful simple jquery if you are careful, like in any language. Once you get used to Jquery you can often find that it is easier to read than the pure JS alternative (see my example above).

Most users know fuck all, and even if they do they don't pay the bills in web development, the client does.

I have never had any performance issues with the stuff I have been creating, if I did I would dive straight into pure JS to get it done as I have been doing this for a while so can do either. Maybe if you were having Jquery performance issues it was with very old versions or you were not writing decent code?

Jquery is just quicker to write so takes less dev time.

Also, out of your list of pure JS replacements about you missed document.createElement(). Once you start having to create elements of the dom tree on the fly JQuery comes into its own in terms of writing less code and hence developers producing quicker results.

Nobody cares about efficiency any more as cpu time is just so much cheaper than the man hours put in to creating code. Writing super efficient code is just not worth wasting time over when modern PC's are so powerful and underutilized. You can complain about this all you like but you are just pissing into the wind, it will never change now even phones have quad core cpus.

(BTW - I actually think everyone should learn to write more efficient code but am old enough to know that most people who pull the strings don't care.)

The problem is that people like yourself are a tiny minority. Most people go "wow, look at pretty swirl that follows my mouse pointer around, isn't it neat!" (this is a piss poor example)

Seriously though, most people love jquery as it means we don't have to do basic animations in flash any more and can do ajax type stuff. Without things like jquery you would be stuck with whole page refreshes just because you wanted to add a row to a form. I have done this sort of stuff in raw JS (I have been a web dev for almost 10 years) and it was just not worth the effort making it cross browser without doing whole page reloads that were slow for the average user. JQuery lets you do dynamic html pages far more easily and build user interfaces that more closely resemble stand alone applications.

Recently I had to create a page that lets users sort a list by clicking and up down arrow next to each item. When I did stuff like this before JQuery it was a PITA to get working and horrible to use, now it is much quicker and easier. For the same amount of time I put in previously I could have let them drag and drop stuff up and down now (I wanted to, but couldn't get it passed management).

This is just because many japanese people lack the gene to process alcohol efficiently so can't drink for shit.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2262318.stm

This makes excessive drinking more of a cultural taboo than it is in Europe and America where it was essential to drink in order to get the nutrition you needed to survive from seasonal crops that only came once a year in our climate. Japan and the far east had the ability to grow crops that could be harvested throughout the year unlike grain.

Whaling for food is illegal. But Japan has come up with some bullshit excuse that they need to conduct scientific research which is why they need to kill whales, then selling the meat as byproduct just makes good sense.

The problem with this is that there is simply no need to kill so many whales for research it's just that Japan's (ruling) older generation view eating whale as such an essential part of their culture they refuse to contemplate change on this front. You might be able to make an argument that what Japan does it legal, but it is still against the spirit of the treaty.

I also think that the individual ships flout the law because they know their is no appetite to prosecute them back home. I certainly think that the average Japanese whaling ship captain will happily follow his prey into Australian waters then lie about it later if they Australian Navy is not around to stop them.

Finally, later this year or early next year the final word on whether what Japan does is legal or not will come down from the ICJ. That will be final and binding (no appeals allowed) but until then no one really knows either way.

Lol. Here in the UK bandwidth caps are pretty much a thing of the past nowadays, I reckon this will just push the ISP's in your country to catch up and start offering decent internet with no caps.

Most web developers I know are forced to do crap loads of PHP on the server side, particularly MVC and OOP stuff. In my neck of the woods we call people who only do client side stuff "front end web developers" and similar. If anyone wants to be a web developer and only knows client side stuff they better be some sort of Javascript / Jquery / Knockout ninja.

If I hired a web developer who could not at least integrate with a web service I would consider them not up to the task. Once you have done that a few times you should be able to create one for other people to use. Web services are an essential part of web development nowadays

Exactly, the problem is that there are plenty of democratic countries where guns are illegal. I live in one. We try and make a democratic choice as a society to make hand guns hard to obtain and this technology undermines our democratic right.

There are a great many people who simply do not want to own a gun. I know people who refused to even try firing one at a designated range in country where it was perfectly legal. Personally I have fired a gun (an AK47) but I have no interest in living in a society where guns are easy to obtain. You might say that guns are already easy to obtain in my country (the UK) but that is not actually the truth, even if you live in and are with rampant gun crime (you can try and buy a gun, but most likely you will just be robbed unless the criminal selling you then gun has reason to not just take you money and keep the gun).

This post will probably be down modded to hell and get a million replies saying how wrong I am and whatever, as most americans I know simply cannot see how you could find the idea of not wanting to have anything to with a gun a bit alien.

Of course the real problem here though is that once new technology is out of the bottle there is no putting it back, its just that I personally would rather Cody he Texan did not go on his crazy evangelical "everyone should be able to own any gun they like" mission in the first place.

Maybe us the UK should start exporting plutonium to Iran if the US is going to force guns onto our streets. (Ok, this is obviously a joke as they would send some of it back our way as well as yours).

Not really sure what you mean as i write mostly server side code even as a web developer.

If you mean being a server admin then I do that too but it doesn't pay as much as I would like.

Contrary to the popular belief on slashdot us professional web developers do not sit around thinking of ways to use new browser features to make sites as slow as shit.

Instead clients come to us as some graphic designer has mocked up this amazing new site for them with tons of flash animations they created, psd files that represent all aspects of the site with each layer representing a different page and some notes on which bits of the site need to be easily editable by the client, which bits obtain dynamic data from another site (like the companies aher price) and finally, with a detailed list of which tracking they want to use to track users journey through their website.

Yup. much of this tracking crap is actually added at the clients request because they want to track how their users browse the site and what advert they clicked on a different site which brings though the clients who buy and what adverts on other sites just generate them click throughs but none that result in a purchase or sign up or whatever they want from the site.

Web developers have to work through this crap and try and convince the designer that some of his design elements are going to kill the page loading time and are uttterly pointless. The ones that have to stay they try their best to make efficient by re-implementing it completely in JQuery or whatever. Try and convert the pointless flash object into a much smaller animated GIF or PNG since it is has no interactivity and is only flash as that is what the designer has tools to create.

They then finally try and steer the client to only implementing the tracking shit on the pages that that are REALLY important (index, basket, purchase complete, etc). But no, the client first insists on the third party tracking be used to track every goddamn product so they can have all the analytics in the system their marketing chumps like using and not forcing them to login in to your site as well. Then they decide that the site is too complicated or something so you need to add the tracking to every page in the help section, then they notice that loads of people get to the index but never buy anything so you have add tracking to find out why (they load the index and decide it loads too slowly then fuck off to a quicker site probably due to the analytics shit).

Finally, the client realises that when the get stuff demoed to them it was done in a designers office with fibre to the back of the demo PC, tests their web site at home and realises everything is slow as shit and asks you to find out why. You tell them, and they say that blaming Google or whoever does the tracking is just passing the buck as the google home page loads really quickly, you must have messed up in creating their site instead.

At this point the web developer realises he can't win and shoots himself in the head :)

Without the shitty marketing products Google and Facebook would cease to exist.

Money makes the world go round and neither of these companies would exist without some way of making money, however great Google search and Facebooks social network is. They both now need huge internet pipes and servers which does not come cheap.

Have you read this thread? There are tons of people talking about want Netflix to work without paying for an Xbox Live subscription, they are not using their console just for gaming are they?

Always on internet definitely not needed according to this: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-05-21-xbox-always-online-the-answer-is-no

As to music and movies you must realise that if they did not build in a blueray player then the vast majority of people would have opted for the PS4 or whatever it will be called (myself included as I don't have a blueray player yet). Also, Bluray drives are so cheap now there is almost no point in using a DVD drive instead. You are very much in the minority if you do not use a games console for watching any sort of movies or other multimedia so betting on everyone being like you would be a sure fire recipe for MS going bankrupt.

As to used games I doubt any of the companies that create games want you you to be able to do this, so they have been lobbying to make sure this is not possible. There will never be another console that supports this unless they can come up with a cast iron DRM system that ensures the same licence can be used on two different machines at the same time, this would probably require an always on internet connection.

Personally I get annoyed by games on my old Xbox360 making get up off the couch to swap disks when both games are installed on the hard disk just so they can be sure I have not sold one of them to a second hand shop (something I would never do as the second hand or trade in cost of a game is a pittance and I buy everything off the web). If they can use an always on internet connection to ensure that two copies of the same game are not being played at once that might fix this and let me stay on the couch but I bet a crap load of other people here would go mental at such an idea so the it is very likely that second hand games will be blocked.

The only way to keep everybody happy in this regard would be to trust their customers to not pirate stuff and the chances of that happening are somewhere between slim and none since the existence of any software piracy whatsoever proves that some people cannot be trusted. This is not saying that piracy costs them a sale, just that people who produce games don't want it to happen even if it doesn't.

Actually I just checked and it seems you will have to pay an additional fee to play a second hand game so you might be able to buy a second hand disk but the licence to use it's contents will be extra and always on internet will be down to the games developers. Seems like they are ignoring no-money cheapskate gypos like you to make it easier for me to stay on the couch, good move MS!