It's built on top of a subset of LLVM IR. Those goyim will never know about our surveillance routines automatically inserted into people's websites by our compiler now that they're hidden deep in the bytecode. Don't worry, we'll still support Javascript to LLVM IR, so you can keep using Node.js!
Name:
Anonymous2015-12-18 18:37
Babe, you know I block javashit anyway
Name:
Anonymous2015-12-18 18:40
Yesterday, Brendan Eich dropped a bomb on the web development community
I don't use homophobic technologies like WebAssembly, I will stick to JavaScript (also known as Java in short)
Name:
Anonymous2015-12-19 7:06
You do realize that it's easy to block it with tools like "Disable Javascript" "Disable Webassembly" and "Noscript"?
Name:
Anonymous2015-12-19 9:40
Just use Lua.
LuaJIT is a ridiculously pragmatic programming language implementation: because of Lua's simple semantics, its “just‑in‑time” compiler is able to generate insanely fast native code.
S‑Lua is aware of three types of data: strings, numbers, and tables.¹ It is implemented in Lua, and its macros are implemented as Lua functions that return abstract syntax trees represented by nested tables. It has no notion of a cons cell and its symbols are just unquoted strings.
Not a Lisp.
Name:
Anonymous2015-12-19 14:15
seems like a lisp to me, a shit one but still one
Name:
Anonymous2015-12-19 14:33
What is the demarcation between a good Lisp, a bad Lisp, a pseudo-Lisp, and a non-Lisp?
In Portuguese, more commonly in its Brazilian variant, troll (produced [ˈtɾɔw] in most of Brazil as spelling pronunciation) is the usual term to denote internet trolls (examples of common derivate terms are trollismo or trollagem, "trolling", and the verb trollar, "to troll", which entered popular use), but an older expression, used by those which want to avoid anglicisms or slangs, is complexo do pombo enxadrista to denote trolling behavior, and pombos enxadristas (literally, "chessplayer pigeons") or simply pombos are the terms used to name the trolls. The terms are explained by an adage or popular saying: "Arguing with fulano (i.e., John Doe) is the same as playing chess with a pigeon: the pigeon defecates on the table, drop the pieces and simply fly, claiming victory."
Name:
Anonymous2015-12-20 5:54
Data mining expert Bing Liu (University of Illinois) estimated that one-third of all consumer reviews on the Internet are fake.[11] According to the New York Times, this has made it hard to tell the difference between "popular sentiment" and "manufactured public opinion."[17] According to an article in the Journal of Business Ethics, astroturfing threatens the legitimacy of genuine grassroots movements. The authors argued that astroturfing that is "purposefully designed to fulfill corporate agendas, manipulate public opinion and harm scientific research represents a serious lapse in ethical conduct."[3] A 2011 report found that often paid posters from competing companies are attacking each other in forums and overwhelming regular participants in the process.[18] George Monbiot said persona management software that supports astroturfing, "could destroy the Internet as a forum for constructive debate."
Name:
Anonymous2015-12-20 5:56
In June 2010, the United States Air Force solicited for "persona management" software that would "enable an operator to exercise a number of different online persons from the same workstation and without fear of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries. Personas must be able to appear to originate in nearly any part of the world and can interact through conventional online services and social media platforms..."[58] The $2.6 million contract was awarded to Ntrepid Corporation for astroturfing software the military would use to spread pro-American propaganda in the Middle East, and disrupt extremist propaganda and recruitment.
Name:
Anonymous2015-12-20 6:05
A 1992 review described Machiavellian motivation as related to cold selfishness and pure instrumentality, and those high on the trait were assumed to pursue their motives (e.g. sex, achievement, sociality) in duplicitous ways. More recent research on the motivations of high Machs compared to low Machs found that they gave high priority to money, power, and competition and relatively low priority to community building, self-love, and family concerns. High Machs admitted to focusing on unmitigated achievement and winning at any cost.[2]