I think that cool features that protects user privacy is hard to come by because this is not the type of feature that brings money.

Protecting the user is (in most of the cases) fighting ads.

Do you really need to track every time that each individual move to do that?

What alternative measures would you propose for tracking volumes and trips?

Track the fact that a journey took place, but not who took it.

The organisation that runs the Tube in London, TFL, did a project[0] where they tracked the path people took by their phone's WiFi signal (all anonymised). This was used to see what routes were preferred and how they could be optimised. Previously all they had was entry/exit data.

[0] https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2017/septem...

But before the algorithm personalized ads journalism wasn’t “dying”, there is ways to do personalized ads without tracking my every move.

Just a little trivia;

The fastest way to reverse a string is in JS is:

  function reverse(s) { 
    var o = []; 
    for (var i = 0, len = s.length; i <= len; i++) 
      o.push(s.charAt(len - i)); 
     return o.join('');  
  }

I never heard any of theses terms or texts, can you provide more background? I tried to search for the one "the Unabomber Manifesto" and it seems to be linked to a "mathematician/terrorist", and in the archive.org there is an article about "bad things of industrialization" and some weird characters, what that means?

Can you explain what i'm missing? I'm young and non-american, maybe i'm missing context.

Yes, the Unabomber was a mathematician-gone-terrorist who had a manifesto of sorts published decrying industrialization and technological profress. His academic career was pretty short. There's a Wikipedia page if you want to read up on it.

There's also a Netflix series called Manhunt: Unabomber which is pretty good.

I believe this article references the Unabomber. If it doesn't, then Ray Kurzweil's "The Age of Spiritual Machines" definitely does.

It's a fascinating line of thought--though I obviously don't support the actions taken by its author.

To clarify a little further, Bill Joy in this essay refers to Kurzweil who refers to Marvin Minsky's "Society of Mind." I became a technological utopian until reading Naomi Klein's "No Logo" later that year, as well as the book "Amusing Ourselves to Death" by Neil Postman.

This ultimately led me on a sort of existential quest that led to the book "Waking Up in Time" by Peter Russell and then I began to have a much more spiritual orientation towards life and reality and now try to be as practical as possible while working towards a positive technological future.

If you want to read it, you can Google its title "Industrial Society and Its Future" [1].

[1] https://www.google.com/search?q=Industrial+Society+and+Its+F...

When develop country start computing the screen were not that big either[0].

Its the beginning, soon enough we all will get those 4k-160hz-retina_display screens. :]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_monitor#/media/File:2...

You are right, both sides are to blame, but this don’t make any of the them better.

In Brazil we have the same mentality of “sides” and I believe that this is destroying the good sense of some people.

It’s not because everyone does it that it should be the norm, or that is not evil.

Our true challenge is how we can stop this type of propaganda without hurting any freedom?

In Brazil All the big publishers are in someway connected to the people in power, so our non-fake-news were never really impartial or independent. Some even say that the media should be controlled by the government (which is to me a 1984 scenario, but not so much different from what it’s today).

I believe that the only way to end this fake-news madness will be a truly anonymous p2p communication, but this would generate another kind of problem.

(Sorry for my english, I’m still learning how to write properly and an argument is kind hard to do, I may sound like provocative but that is because of my lack of vocabulary not my intentions)

> You are right, both sides are to blame, but this don’t make any of the them better.

(Both sides refer to the broadcast/online media & commercial/political ad campaigns)

Blame can only be placed on either party if there exists the prior assumption that people should believe all things which are presented to them as fact. If this assumption does not exist and without facilities responsible for fact-checking then it's only the individual that is responsible for dividing fact from fiction.

> You are right, both sides are to blame, but this don’t make any of the them better.

He wasn't saying this, he was calling out someone who, in a very dishonest manner, attributed a commonly perceived as bad trait to only one third party of his choosing. This, of course, while ignoring the fact that those he was trying to defend did the same and so rendered his argument useless and turned his deliberately included emotional cues into something short of deception.

I have that "faint unease" too, i need to give it more importance.

In the beginning i learn to ignore it because the mentality of "moving fast and break things", and really worked because my tasks were fairly simple and it would have fewer critical points, but thinking now that is harmful when doing more complex things, i should slow down and trust in my 'feeling' more.

I will implement the "final walk around" in my dev/thought process, this is a really valuable advice, thank you.

PS. `git add -p` is amazing, thank you for this too.

I'm gonna start writing more, i giving myself more time to code and review.

Do you have any recommendations on TDD books?

Hands down the best book. Plus the authors are really nice guys! http://www.growing-object-oriented-software.com

I challenge your best book with the book of Kent Beck (founder of TDD) https://www.amazon.co.uk/Test-Driven-Development-Addison-Wes...

I was hoping someone would mention it! While it is a good book as well (and Kent Beck has many of them!) I tend to describe his book as 1st generation TDD. It certainly was a great breakthrough in 2002 but it misses some very good thoughts that only came later (and to give credit: probably only thanks to his book). So, GOOS for me is the 2nd generation of TDD. Especially part II is invaluable to give as a reading and thinking exercise for my new devs.

+1 for this recommendation, even if you don't buy into TDD after reading it, it also covers a lot of great OOP principles as well.