Why aren’t you learning the most kino programming language ever invented...

>Urbit
about once a year I go back and look at this and I've still never been able to figure out what its supposed to be or how its supposed to work. It feels exactly like being sober and having someone high as fuck try to explain to you their great epiphany about the structure of the universe. The more they tell you the less sense it makes.

It’s not even that complicated—it’s just a way to keep Google from owning all your data. Everyone involved in the project is based and redpilled. If you want to learn they offer free Hoon courses.

Why not? When I am rich, I can push Lisp agenda, my personal army can BTFO iToddlers, and so on. I can be a shitposter with the power no shitposter ever acquired yet.
Isn't that a dream?

Attached: 1523503923-163-int.jpg (394x400, 36K)

Got too much going on to just start investigating random languages. And, frankly, when things cool down I'll be more interesting exploring frameworks and deployment practices than toy languages.

Find someone less productive to earn your reputation off of. Once you got that then maybe I'll look at you.

That's where the funny part begin.
>1. Unlike some new elegant language that are somethings useful for five years, "outdated and inelegant fedora languages" are used in most systems and cannot be replaced. In 2060 we'll have assembly programmers, like we had in 1960.
>2. Every single college graduated and self-learning programmer know something like python or ruby, this makes you replaceable. Very few people know this languages, even fewer know how to write decent code with it. (also low wages and bad working conditions)
>3. While knowing something new and elegant is great, you'll only build small applications and be micromanaged by marketing and administrative personnel. While on old languages you get the chance t actually do something new.
Just learn something useful, hipster.

this is accurate, we use php + c + node js and get a good salary, but the cobol people at my company just do what they please and everything always works, and they probably get paid a lot more than me.

Wages around here are like (all regular workers, no juniors/seniors):
>Hipster start-up trash: $1500/month
>Web dev. front: $2000/month
>Web dev. back: $3000/month
>Desktop programmer: $5000/month
>Manager: $7500/month
>DB programmer: $8000/month
>Mainframe programmer: $11000/month

Is that quotation of anything or just funny green arrows?

>I'm too slow to understand text formatting
No surprise, you're a cool-programmer after all.

oh man, I wish in my country you could earn 1500 as a trash programmer, I have 4 years work experience, got into a relatively well paid job and earn roughly 1000 dollars.
And unless you're a manager at a huge company you can aim to earn about 2500 at most. I'm guessing the really rich managers earn about 6000 dollars.

You're over-generalizing FAR too much. The entire point of "regular" programming languages (i.e, what makes them "regular") is that the entire industry revolves around them and so there are jobs at every end of the spectrum involving them.

Whereas if you learn something (relatively) esoteric like COBOL then there are only a few jobs out there and you can only get them if you're an expert system programmer.

It's like saying "on average, people with PhDs in Biological Chemistry make more than people who speak English."

It's in local currency, it's basically 1/4 of a dollar.
It's really a niche thing, there are few jobs and they are usually incredible hard. But being niche is the reason why the working condition and wages are good.

It's like saying, it's a better idea to be a Biological Chemistry PhD than to learn to learn how to clean cars.

>kino
>urbit chads
>based and redpilled
is that all you can say about it? just Jow Forums buzzwords?

System Programmers don't make Big Pharma money and all tech jobs are all cushy.

I bet you think you're making a point about how "doing things right might be unpopular, but it's profitable if you're good at it", but frankly you're coming off as one of those NEETs who like the idea of programming a lot better than the actual process of programming and so romanticize an image of a fully-autonomous code wizard which never actually existed.

I think what he meant by regular languages, is that c,java, and to an extent php and some others are a little harder and older than the regular python, javascript or whatever, and are also fairly older (yeah I know python is actually really old, but the modern applications of python are barely 10 - 15 years old).
So it's much more probable that you'll find people willing to code in python than to put up with c's "bullshit" (actually just a lot more low level stuff). So the market is going to be saturated with python programmers, therefore its going to be possible to pay them less.

Sorry for the long reply.
>System Programmers don't make Big Pharma money
I'm not talking about system programmers, but about some niche jobs that give you the opportunity to program a system with your coworkers, which I consider more pleasant than writing applications.
>all tech jobs are all cushy.
There are some tech jobs that have less people than needed, but those are incredible hard or have another reason to be this way. Do you know someone, anyone that write decent code on COBOL?
>I bet you think you're making a point about how "doing things right might be unpopular, but it's profitable if you're good at it"
I'm only saying doing something that is needed and very few people do it very profitable
>but frankly you're coming off as one of those NEETs who like the idea of programming a lot better than the actual process of programming and so romanticize an image of a fully-autonomous code wizard which never actually existed.
user, you don't need to project and offend, there are far better arguments.

>>It’s not even that complicated—it’s just a way to keep Google from owning all your data.
if its not complicated, why are they reinventing so many wheels? why do they need a new programming language? There are already lots of privacy tools and decentralized services. Why didn't they build one of those, or work on integrating what's there, instead of trying to create a new universe?

The project very much strikes me as concerned with abstraction for abstraction's sake, less about the nominal goals and more about some imagined standard of elegance.

>why are they reinventing so many wheels?
Because they gain money if people use their "new" wheels.

most ppls prob isn't learning cobol, it's learning Z/OS, the z/architecture and the other stuff surrounding it. i.e., most cobol devs have to still use HLASM for some things which can be tricky even for ppl with previous ASM experience.

i love cobol (and pl/i) and z/os tho