• 开源镜像
  • 开源沙龙
  • 媛宝
  • 猿帅
  • 注册
  • 登录
  • 息壤开源生活方式平台
  • 加入我们

开源日报

  • 开源日报第1030期:《在线演示 PPTist》

    6 2 月, 2021
    开源日报 每天推荐一个 GitHub 优质开源项目和一篇精选英文科技或编程文章原文,坚持阅读《开源日报》,保持每日学习的好习惯。
    今日推荐开源项目:《在线演示 PPTist》
    今日推荐英文原文:《5 Essential Takeaways From “The Pragmatic Programmer”》

    今日推荐开源项目:《在线演示 PPTist》传送门:项目链接
    推荐理由:该项目是基于 Vue3.x + TypeScript 的在线演示文稿应用,还原了大部分PPT常用功能,同时支持丰富的快捷键和右键菜单,尽可能还原本地桌面应用的使用体验。
    今日推荐英文原文:《5 Essential Takeaways From “The Pragmatic Programmer”》作者:Jamie Bullock
    原文链接:https://medium.com/better-programming/5-essential-takeaways-from-the-pragmatic-programmer-6bb3db986294
    推荐理由:The Pragmatic Programmer(《程序员修炼之道》)这本书,算是计算机界的畅销书了,本文简要介绍了书中的五个基本要点。

    5 Essential Takeaways From “The Pragmatic Programmer”

    Key points from the best-selling coding book of all time

    The Pragmatic Programmer was first published in 1999 and has since been named the best programming book of all time.

    Authors Andy Hunt and David Thomas were among the original authors of the Agile Manifesto and have some serious credentials. The book has achieved an average rating of 4.3 on Goodreads from over 16,000 ratings. Suffice to say it’s one of those books every programmer should read.

    In this review, I’m going to condense the book into five essential takeaways.

    1. Don’t Repeat Yourself

    Thomas coined the term “DRY” (or Don’t Repeat Yourself), one of the most useful rules for achieving high-quality code that has ever existed. The authors define the DRY principle as follows:

    “Every piece of knowledge must have a single, unambiguous, authoritative representation within a system.”
    In the book, they give the following example as non-DRY code:

    def print_balance(account)
      printf "Debits: %10.2f\n", account.debits 
      printf "Credits: %10.2f\n", account.credits
      if account.fees < 0
        printf "Fees: %10.2f-\n", -account.fees
      else
        printf "Fees: %10.2f\n", account.fees 
      end
      printf " ———-\n" 
      if account.balance < 0
        printf "Balance: %10.2f-\n", -account.balance
      else
        printf "Balance: %10.2f\n", account.balance
      end
    end
    
    This is then refactored to the following DRY version:

    def format_amount(value)
      result = sprintf("%10.2f", value.abs) 
      if value < 0
        result + "-" 
      else
        result + " " 
      end
    end
    
    def print_line(label, value)
      printf "%-9s%s\n", label, value
    end
    
    def report_line(label, amount)
      print_line(label + ":", format_amount(amount))
    end
    
    def print_balance(account) 
      report_line("Debits", account.debits) 
      report_line("Credits", account.credits) 
      report_line("Fees", account.fees) print_line("", "———-") 
      report_line("Balance", account.balance)
    end
    
    In the second fragment, the duplication of constants is removed. Equivalent lines are encapsulated into separate functions for printing, formatting, and reporting.

    Interestingly, this actually results in more code. However, the result is more readable, maintainable, testable, and scalable. The DRY principle could be viewed as a means to achieve these other outcomes.

    The authors emphasise that DRY is not only about avoiding literal code duplication. This is just a small part of the picture. They write:

    “DRY is about the duplication of knowledge, of intent. It’s about expressing the same thing in two different places, possibly in two totally different ways.”
    Duplication could be in representation, data structures, API design, or could even refer to duplicated effort between team members. The latter is a management issue discussed later in the book.

    2. Mindset Is As Important as Knowledge

    Unlike typical programming books, much of The Pragmatic Programmer is not about the code itself but rather the mindset and philosophy of the programmer.

    A lot of what is discussed boils down to thinking about software development more generally as an end-to-end process rather than simply zooming in on the code. This makes sense. After all, programmers are not paid to write code but to produce working software!

    Some important aspects of this mindset include:

    + Taking responsibility for your work by not making excuses or passing blame when things go wrong. + Writing software that’s “good enough.” This means not wasting time on things that are better than they need to be to make the product successful. + Not ignoring technical debt. The authors use the analogy of broken windows for this:

    “Don’t leave ‘broken windows’’ (bad designs, wrong decisions, or poor code) unrepaired. Fix each one as soon as it is discovered. If there is insufficient time to fix it properly, then board it up. Perhaps you can comment out the offending code, or display a ‘Not Implemented’ message, or substitute dummy data instead.”
    I find this last point interesting. The authors are not saying code needs to be perfect but that it needs to be kept in a condition where it doesn’t deteriorate. A boarded-up window might not look great, but it prevents a whole bunch of other problems from building up over time.

    3. Good Code Is Easy To Change

    For me, possibly the most important takeaway from The Pragmatic Programmer is the Easy to Change (ETC) principle.

    How often as programmers do we get UI changes from a designer or new requirements from customers that mean reimplementing existing functionality? Basically all the time. Yes, in an ideal world, we’d get a fully considered design up front that we can turn into perfectly crafted code, but the real world doesn’t work like that.

    The Easy to Change principle solves this problem. It states that:

    “Good Design Is Easier to Change Than Bad Design.”
    The authors present this as a guiding value from which many other software engineering principles derive. Specifically, much of SOLID could be thought of as a special case of ETC.

    “Why is decoupling good? Because by isolating concerns we make each easier to change. Why is the single responsibility principle useful? Because a change in requirements is mirrored by a change in just one module. Why is naming important? Because good names make code easier to read, and you have to read it to change it.”

    If you write code with changeability in mind, then next time a designer revises the layout, life will be much easier!

    4. Choose Great Tools and Become Fluent With Them

    Joel Spolsky famously wrote that programmers should have “the best tools money can buy” in order to be fully productive. The Pragmatic Programmer aligns with this notion and has an entire chapter dedicated to tools.

    “Tools amplify your talent.”
    I must admit, I’ve become so obsessed with finding the absolute best tools that some of this chapter felt a bit obvious to me, but it was reassuring to have my assumptions reaffirmed. The key takeaways are:

    1. Keep knowledge in plain text. According to the authors, this means text “understandable to humans.” This includes HTML, JSON, etc. The reasoning is that it’s more sustainable than binary formats and easier to manipulate with scripts and other software. 2. Always use version control. The authors argue that version control should be used for any project, even when working only on your local computer. 3. Become fluent with your tools. It’s tempting as a developer to constantly keep evaluating new tools and switching between them. Whilst this can have some value, it’s often better to become highly fluent with the tools you already have.

    5. Agile Is Probably Not What You Think It Is

    Both authors of The Pragmatic Programmer were involved in writing the original Agile Manifesto. I was therefore expecting a chapter on a favoured agile methodology — SCRUM or maybe Kanban. But there was no such thing. In fact, they actively criticise rigid methodologies and their associated certifications:

    “Many certification programs are actually even worse […]: they are predicated on the student being able to memorize and follow the rules. But that’s not what you want. You need the ability to see beyond the existing rules and exploit possibilities for advantage. That’s a very different mindset from ‘but Scrum/Lean/Kanban/XP/agile does it this way…’ and so on.”
    Instead, they suggest that developers take the best pieces from a range of methodologies and adapt them for use, advocating what they call The Essence of Agility.

    What this means in practice is there can never be an “agile process” because, by definition, being agile is about “responding to change.” According to the authors, project management decisions should always be contextual, depending on your company, the nature of the team, and many other factors. No pre-defined process can take account of all this.

    So what does this mean in practice? How can projects be managed? The Pragmatic Programmer provides three brilliant and universal steps:

    1. Work out where you are. 2. Make the smallest meaningful step towards where you want to be. 3. Evaluate where you end up and fix anything you broke. They suggest repeating these steps until you’re done and using them recursively at every level of everything you do.

    Conclusion

    As you will have gathered from this review, The Pragmatic Programmer isn’t really a book about programming. It’s a book about building working software. This requires many other skills besides writing code.

    Going into every detail is beyond the scope of this article, but there is also excellent advice on:

    + Estimating + Requirements analysis + Refactoring + Testing + Prototyping and many aspects of coding If I have one minor criticism, it’s that the book doesn’t have one central theme about what it means to be “pragmatic.” It feels more like a long list of aphorisms woven together with supporting explanations. These are some world-class aphorisms, though, and overall this book is essential reading for any developer.


    下载开源日报APP:https://opensourcedaily.org/2579/
    加入我们:https://opensourcedaily.org/about/join/
    关注我们:https://opensourcedaily.org/about/love/
  • 开源日报第1029期:《IntelliJ-IDEA-Tutorial》

    5 2 月, 2021
    开源日报 每天推荐一个 GitHub 优质开源项目和一篇精选英文科技或编程文章原文,坚持阅读《开源日报》,保持每日学习的好习惯。
    今日推荐开源项目:《IntelliJ-IDEA-Tutorial》
    今日推荐英文原文:《Andy Jassy quietly built a giant at Amazon. As CEO, he steps into the spotlight》

    今日推荐开源项目:《IntelliJ-IDEA-Tutorial》传送门:项目链接
    推荐理由:强大的集成能力, 提示功能的快速、便捷, 好用的快捷键和代码模板以及精准搜索使得idea成为了开发者的不二之选. 而idea选项众多, 很多程序猿卡在了如何使用这款利器上. 该项目整合了官方文档, 翻译成中文, 对众多小白更加友好.
    今日推荐英文原文:《Andy Jassy quietly built a giant at Amazon. As CEO, he steps into the spotlight》作者:Laura Hautala
    原文链接:https://www.cnet.com/news/andy-jassy-quietly-built-a-giant-at-amazon-as-ceo-he-steps-into-the-spotlight/
    推荐理由:Andy Jassy将于 7 月出任亚马逊首席执行官,他曾在 2017 年的一次会议上发表讲话。Jassy领导了亚马逊网络服务的创建,并就政治问题发表了自由言论,但现在他成为了整个公司的焦点。

    Andy Jassy quietly built a giant at Amazon. As CEO, he steps into the spotlight

    The name Andy Jassy might not have rung any bells for most people Tuesday morning, but by the afternoon, the world knew him as the heir apparent and next CEO of Amazon. Already a chief executive in his own right — if not one well-versed on the public stage — the head of Amazon Web Services and 24-year employee at the tech juggernaut will step into the spotlight to helm the company starting in July once founder Jeff Bezos transitions to the role of executive chairman.

    Jassy will run a highly profitable company at a time when it has grown larger than ever, thanks in part to the pandemic. Amazon’s already enormous retail business has spent the past year scaling up dramatically to meet the surge in demand from pandemic shoppers stuck at home, and Jassy’s own cloud computing unit controls a third of the market.

    Amazon, however, also faces the scrutiny of regulators as the federal government investigates Amazon for potential antitrust violations and lawmakers like Sen. Bernie Sanders accuses the company of profiting off of price spikes during the pandemic. Like Bezos before him, every move by Jassy will be under the microscope.

    How Jassy will handle this scrutiny over Amazon’s dominance, in addition to steering divisions of the company he wasn’t previously a part of, remains to be seen. He quietly built Amazon’s cloud service business into a market leader and the company’s most profitable segment. But he hasn’t faced the questions of regulators and Congress.

    His past press appearances show Jassy is comfortable speaking to controversy and conversant in Amazon’s stances on its own size and dominance. But, he wasn’t the person in charge of the company then.

    Now he’ll have to face critiques over a range of issues, including the company’s creation of facial recognition products; the safety and authenticity of products sold by the third-party vendors that make up about half of Amazon’s sales; its impact on the environment; and its treatment of warehouse and delivery workers. Not to mention whether Amazon has illegal monopoly power.

    Jassy holds to Amazon’s corporate values

    Analysts weren’t surprised by Jassy’s promotion. A seasoned Amazonian who has worked closely with Bezos, Jassy built up AWS from its beginning in 2003. In a foreword to a 2017 book about cloud computing, Jassy wrote that his team took an internal software tool developed to increase efficiency in Amazon’s engineering teams and made it into a valuable product for other businesses, too. This led to the creation of Amazon Simple Storage Service, or Amazon S3.

    Amazon didn’t make Jassy available for an interview for this story. His past speeches and writings show Jassy embraces Bezos’ ethos of going all in on a new idea, building on any success or moving on if it flops.

    “This is an astute approach to succession planning,” said Nicholas McQuire, an analyst at CCS Insight who focuses on executives. “Bezos created the blueprint for internet businesses: rapid innovation, huge scale and relentless focus on the customer,” he said, adding that Jassy is one of the few people who can replicate that formula.

    “Often you’re going to have to reinvent yourself multiple times over” to build a business that will last for decades, Jassy said in a keynote address at AWS’ re:Invent conference in December He went on to praise Netflix for “cannibalizing its own DVD rental business” when it anticipated how important streaming would become.

    Jassy’s grasp of why cloud computing became essential to businesses everywhere also applies to Amazon’s larger success story. “With the cloud, you provision what you need, scale up seamlessly when needed, and shed resources and costs when it’s not needed,” Jassy said in the foreword to the 2017 book.

    It’s the kind of flexibility that’s at the center of Amazon’s ethos.

    Jassy will have to face controversy

    Carrying on a corporate mantra that has made Amazon a success for shareholders is one thing. Another is facing external criticism and attempts at regulation. That same taste for scaling has quickly put Amazon in the crosshairs for its market dominance and potential power to quash or acquire competitors.

    In a 2019 interview with PBS’ Frontline, Jassy dealt with questions over whether Amazon has too much power. At the time, he said Amazon doesn’t see itself as so big, only making up about 1% of the retail sector internationally. It will be a different task to convince antitrust regulators that Amazon reaping one in 100 dollars of global retail sales isn’t astounding (and the US number is higher).

    Regulators are particularly concerned about Amazon’s private label business, and its ability to unfairly undercut other retailers on its platform with cheaper competing products.

    Jassy has also been outspoken on political issues. As Business Insider pointed out, he tweeted in support of a US Supreme Court decision upholding employment protections for LGBTQ workers and decried high incarceration rates in the US, and he highlighted the injustice of the murders of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor and George Floyd during his re:Invent keynote address. Bezos has been less vocal on political issues, and it’s not clear whether Jassy will be able to express himself so freely now that he’ll be the face of Amazon.

    Then there’s Amazon’s ability to control what exists on the internet. AWS commands more than a third of the cloud market. Technically, AWS could also take a lot of the internet offline. In the same Frontline interview, Jassy alluded to this power.

    “If there’s any kind of documented proof of people misusing the technology,” he said, “we will suspend people’s ability not just to use the technology but to use AWS.”

    Jassy was addressing concerns that law enforcement would abuse its facial recognition technology. But his words took on new meaning this year when AWS suspended cloud hosting services to Parler, a social media platform used during the Capitol riot on Jan. 6, for not moderating content calling for violence.

    Now Jassy will have to take heat from Congress and regulators not only as Amazon’s future CEO, but also as the owner of the decision to take Parler offline. Whether or not AWS was right to do so, he’ll have to explain what it means that it could.
    下载开源日报APP:https://opensourcedaily.org/2579/
    加入我们:https://opensourcedaily.org/about/join/
    关注我们:https://opensourcedaily.org/about/love/
  • 开源日报第1028期:《强行遍历法 SocialEngineeringDictionaryGenerator》

    4 2 月, 2021
    开源日报 每天推荐一个 GitHub 优质开源项目和一篇精选英文科技或编程文章原文,坚持阅读《开源日报》,保持每日学习的好习惯。
    今日推荐开源项目:《强行遍历法 SocialEngineeringDictionaryGenerator》
    今日推荐英文原文:《Software Development Culture Is Too Positive — and It Might Hurt Us》

    今日推荐开源项目:《强行遍历法 SocialEngineeringDictionaryGenerator》传送门:项目链接
    推荐理由:这个项目通过将个人信息进行各种排列组合来生成可能的密码序列,再算上常用的弱密码表,没准里面就能猜中一个正确密码。如果自己使用的密码也在这些计算得出的可能性中的话,最好还是早点换密码吧,使用随机生成的密码再怎么说也比有迹可循的密码要更安全一些。
    今日推荐英文原文:《Software Development Culture Is Too Positive — and It Might Hurt Us》作者:Albert Kozłowski
    原文链接:https://medium.com/better-programming/software-development-culture-is-too-positive-and-it-might-hurt-us-3ed24ac592d8
    推荐理由:开发者热爱编程,但没有必要一直追求新事物或者把精力放在编程上,适合才是最好的

    Software Development Culture Is Too Positive — and It Might Hurt Us

    Anything that looks too optimistic comes with a hidden cost

    It feels weird to write about something being too positive. However, I have started noticing that many software development problems might be caused by people being too positive and passionate. Let me explain.

    Burnout

    Isn’t it weird that so many young people are already feeling burnt out after a few years of work? I keep meeting people who need a break after just their first year or two. I’ve also experienced burnout myself (twice even). The first time, I had to take a six-month break. The second time, which was very recent, I needed a full year off before I could come back to programming.

    This year, I’ve spent a lot of time with people outside tech and noticed one thing: We don’t complain much about our work. We complain about bad bosses and bad projects, but not about coding itself. We take passion for granted. Surprised? Go through job offers. Passion is often one of the must-haves listed on them. We are expected to love our job, and even more, we are expected to make programming the center of our universes.

    But what about the people who do not love programming and still do their job all the same? Try to identify yourself as one of those among your colleagues or on Twitter, and you will immediately be dismissed as being a bad developer. However, is that really the case? People who do their job and try something different after working hours can be amazing programmers too. Not everyone needs to come home and work on side projects, create blog posts and YouTube videos about coding, and read programming books for fun.

    I have been one of those people trying to work through all my spare time. For many years, I felt guilty if I didn’t spend all my waking time chasing some imaginary productivity goal — and guess where that landed me?

    Shiny New Things

    Another aspect that is heavily biased against negative feedback is following new trends originating from FAANG companies. Try to speak up against SOA or Docker. Try to propose using an older, more mature language and SSR. It’s similar to having a passion for work. People immediately conclude that you are not a good developer, as you are “blocking the progress.” Not everyone is running thousands of microservices like Uber and not every company needs K8S. However, it’s hard not to get on board — or at least pretend to be on board. How many organizations fail to migrate to React or Angular and are left with a code base split between the old “bad” code that was working and the new code that developers are still fighting to make work?

    This recent article shows the reality in many organizations:I Almost Got Fired for Choosing React in Our Enterprise App(https://medium.com/better-programming/i-almost-got-fired-for-choosing-react-in-our-enterprise-app-846ea840841c)

    Best Practices

    When I was a Technical Lead, I often heard the phrase “because it is a good practice.” I would then ask further questions and often noticed that the person didn’t quite understand the solution. It was my litmus test to know when to dig deeper.

    How many of these “universal” best practices aren’t really universal? DRY (Don’t Repeat Yourself) is often said in the same sentence as KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid), yet they are often mutually exclusive practices. “Simple” means no unnecessary abstractions, yet starting with DRY code leads exactly to premature abstractions.

    I personally use the rule of 3X:

    “We have the delusion of reuse. Don’t feel bad. It’s an endemic disease among software developers. An occupational hazard, really.
    …
    It is three times as difficult to build reusable components as single-use components, and A reusable component should be tried out in three different applications before it will be sufficiently general to accept into a reuse library.” — Coding Horror
    Obviously, I don’t treat it as a maxim. It’s more of a rule of thumb than good practice. But even here, we are getting to the same problem. People who dare suggest using singleton or any other hated anti-patterns are perceived as less than stellar developers.

    Summary

    The expectation that real software developers, hackers, and geeks are defined by their vocation feels like being in some sort of RPG game. Your trade will forever define you, and once you choose this path, there is no way back.

    We, as developers, are expected to love programming. But why? The simple truth is that it is good for employers. How many horror stories have come out of game dev? Yet many young people dream about working in the gaming industry only to be replaced by another batch of young, naive people after a few years.

    We need to normalize people not “loving” to code, and we need to normalize having a healthy work-life balance in tech. We need people to be more open about their opinions, even if they are against the moment’s hype.

    Don’t get me wrong, I really like being a software developer and I like programming. However, I am not sure if I love it being the center of my universe anymore.

    I want to try other things, and that is absolutely OK.
    下载开源日报APP:https://opensourcedaily.org/2579/
    加入我们:https://opensourcedaily.org/about/join/
    关注我们:https://opensourcedaily.org/about/love/
  • 开源日报第1027期:《GitHub Actions Virtual Environments》

    3 2 月, 2021
    开源日报 每天推荐一个 GitHub 优质开源项目和一篇精选英文科技或编程文章原文,坚持阅读《开源日报》,保持每日学习的好习惯。
    今日推荐开源项目:《GitHub Actions Virtual Environments》
    今日推荐英文原文:《If We Fix Our Media, Can We Fix Ourselves?》

    今日推荐开源项目:《GitHub Actions Virtual Environments》传送门:项目链接
    推荐理由:GitHub Action 是 GitHub 于 2018 年 10 月推出的一个 CI\CD 服务。该项目包含了运行 GitHub Action 的虚拟环境的源代码和镜像。
    今日推荐英文原文:《If We Fix Our Media, Can We Fix Ourselves?》作者:Colin Horgan
    原文链接:https://cfhorgan.medium.com/if-we-fix-our-media-can-we-fix-ourselves-ce2486682283
    推荐理由:本文探讨了美国的现代媒体(电视、互联网)和社交平台对社会的深刻影响。我们将媒体视为信息渠道,但同时,媒体传递的信息正是媒体本身对人类事物的影响。

    If We Fix Our Media, Can We Fix Ourselves?

    Regulating media content isn’t going to solve our problems — the trouble lies deeper

    It feels like we dodged something — at least for now. For all the wild events in recent weeks, it feels like they could have been wilder. It’s tempting to look at the January 6 mob invasion of the Capitol in Washington, D.C. as the culmination of a period we’ve now left, as a collective experience that’s ended. This is unlikely. Instead of asking “what happened?” we should ask “what’s happening?”

    Examining media isn’t the only way to answer that question, but it feels like a good place to start, not least because Trump was not just a creation of late-20th and early-21st Century media, but an avatar for it. This was true in a strict sense, in that he was an exemplar of the worst tendencies of TV — its exaggerations and simplifications, its pandering to the lowest common denominator, its casual favouring of emotion over facts or of reaction over reason, and so on.

    Financial Times columnist Janan Ganesh last week lamented the “debasement” of TV news that began in the late 1990s as the true point of “identifiable rupture in public civility,” the long-term effects of which we are only now coming to terms with. “Perhaps the strife of our day is traceable to a new means of communication. The error is to cite the most modish one,” Ganesh wrote. “Just as likely, we are still processing an expansion of TV news that is not that much older.”

    It’s an interesting thought, but maybe an incomplete one. In the end, it’s not sufficient to truly contextualize the Trump era, in that it assumes a difference between the TV of the 1990s and that of previous years. But the problem might not lie with content. More likely, we’re not experiencing the impact of one kind of TV, but that of TV itself. That is, we’re living through a shift in human experience embedded in the medium from its genesis, rather than one generated from a form of its content. It seems more likely that the qualities of ‘debased’ TV Ganesh cites — the fabricated immediacy, the emotion and the histrionics — have actually been latent features of TV all along that simply took decades to be fully expressed.

    But even that might be looking at things too narrowly. The impact of TV and, in subsequent years, the internet, is not limited to how it changes the behaviours it most frequently showcases, like discussion and debate becoming futile and toxic. We have to consider the implications of media much more broadly.

    To borrow from Marshall McLuahn, the message of all media is action — they are “‘make happen’ agents.” Take TV or the internet, for example — we can refer to them separately, despite the fact that the former is increasingly also the latter. We like to think of these as information channels, ways in which we engage and learn about the world, but McLuhan would warn that’s to focus too closely on their content. McLuhan was clear that message of a medium is the impact it made on human affairs — “the personal and social consequences… [that] result from the new scale that is introduced into our affairs by each extension of ourselves, or by any new technology,” he wrote. In other words, the unanticipated consequences of humans using a new tool.

    What action has TV and the internet prompted in us? What is it that they have changed? Among the social and personal consequences, surely, is our capacity for trust in one another and our collective institutions, which is declining. Both these forms of modern media carry a similar promise: they will bring the world to you, emphasis on you. Structured on profit (which you create), not information, they are media about and for the individual. The audience may be potentially vast, but how many people are engaged either with TV or internet at any given moment is irrelevant to the individual user. What matters is that you are there. You are the programmer, the time-keeper, the researcher, and the expert. Your tastes and your opinions are reinforced more and more narrowly — caught not so much an echo chamber as in a feedback loop.

    Over time, the individualistic nature of thes media in form as much as content tell us that the only person you can really trust is yourself. That is to say, it is the individualistic form of media itself rather than the introduction of a specific kind of TV programming that’s more likely the source of a rupture in public civility, in that TV has fostered a culture of individual primacy rather than that of the community. Social platforms have pushed this to new extremes.

    Where does this leave us? In the wake of the Trump years, replete as they were with toxic hearsay, falsehoods, and straight-up conspiracy, we’re now looking to reform our popular mass media by focusing on their capacity to curb the proliferation of content, specifically blatant mis- or disinformation and conspiracy. Certainly, content drives action in the short term. Social platforms in particular are, at their most effective, tools for rapid message dissemination and organization. But we may quickly discover that this type of reform either doesn’t work at all or doesn’t work for long. We will likely find that the messages our mass media helps spread are not where its power truly lies. Instead, its power is in delivery, which is structural and much more difficult to contend with. That is, it always give the audience what it wants.


    下载开源日报APP:https://opensourcedaily.org/2579/
    加入我们:https://opensourcedaily.org/about/join/
    关注我们:https://opensourcedaily.org/about/love/
←上一页
1 2 3 4 5 … 262
下一页→

Proudly powered by WordPress