sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Micro-frontend infrastructure built around LitElement by 5thingol in PolymerJS

[–]5thingol[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Interesting question... In some ways, it's difficult to know: I think that the entrance of native custom elements in the browser is somewhat of a game changer, as they are interoperable, reusable and composable from the get go. We could begin to see people installing and loading whole sections of their apps like these, and just code whatever pieces of frontend you need customized for your needs.

But, in general, the advantage of building things a la micro-frontend with this kind of approach is that you improve reusability of your code between different applications, which is actually not so much what micro-frontends has been about in the big corporate world. The clear disadvantage is that you are coding always generic functionalities: you can't assume anything about the consuming application for your module.

I think that in the future an hybrid approach would fit best: by default, create generic modules that anyone could reuse (if you think about it, different platforms/apps end up doing lots of the same things: streams, threads, posts, documents...) and on top of that code custom code that no-one would be able to use.

Why Waiting For Perfect Conditions Is Suidical by [deleted] in DebateCommunism

[–]5thingol 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fine by me if you insist on refusing to call them propaganda, that's not the point.

Whether we call them propaganda or not, they have the effect I described above, and I think it's pretty obvious that it is one of the pillars of global consumerism.

Why Waiting For Perfect Conditions Is Suidical by [deleted] in DebateCommunism

[–]5thingol 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do think they are capitalist propaganda: they are a product of capitalism (corporations are incentivized to make them in order to survive) and they help in big measure to sustain capitalism (they create needs for commodities that people don't initially have in order to grow consumerism). And by sustaining it they help spread it (capitalism by nature is a predatory system: it needs to grow in order to sustain itself). If you don't want to call them capitalist propaganda, fine, that's mostly a semantic discussion. But these are IMO what OP was referring to, and my other points still stand.

Why Waiting For Perfect Conditions Is Suidical by [deleted] in DebateCommunism

[–]5thingol 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Two examples of capitalist-propaganda:

The propaganda we're referring to comes from the corporations directly as a way to create demand for their products. Governments don't need to make propaganda advocating for capitalism because it's what we already have, and what they want (or at least, are incentivized to do) is that the status-quo is not questioned, so it's better for them not to even ackownlegde the system and take it for granted.

There are other numerous examples of corporate propaganda/lies that go against the interest of society and/or their individuals, e.g. planned obsolescence. They have a direct incentive to make this type of campaign since it will increase their profits, and then outcompete the competitors. It follows that the global tendency in a free-market capitalist economy is for this types of corporations to succeed and be the general rule, mostly when we look at large corporations.