Lady @Lady@cat.family

@aescling @wallhackio @coriander point 2 on the other hand is walked back thruout season 4, but only thematically (in that Korra continues to deal with psychological fallout from the events of the previous 3 seasons)

@aescling @wallhackio @coriander no not really; season 1’s conflict is actually “resolved” in the recap at the beginning of season 2 when they say that they replaced the council with an elected nonbending president, but this doesn’t REALLY address the main point (which i think is impossible to address in the Avatar universe)

@wallhackio @coriander @Satsuma killed the gays

and also was like “maybe some people like being in slavery”

and also some other stuff probably idk it was way too long

@wallhackio @coriander i think @Satsuma has ranted before to me at great length about how modern fandom was created when J.K. Rowling published book 5 of Harry Potter and all the fans who had spent the previous 4 books creating fan theories were suddenly confronted with the fact that actually J.K. Rowling has much worse ideas than they did and also couldn’t write

@wallhackio @coriander fix-it concepts are better because instead of claiming that canon IS making this niche and weird claim, you are claiming that canon SHOULD have made this niche and weird claim, which is more critical

@wallhackio @coriander as i recall your “fan theory” was proven wrong by canon a few episodes later which automatically converts it from “fan theory” into “fix-it concept”

@lanodan @aschmitz indeed: https://discourse.gnome.org/t/security-issues-in-libxslt/28373

@Satsuma i’m not ANGRY i’m EXASPERATED

@vaporeon_ @wallhackio to answer question 1, basically when JavaScript was first introduced they made a small number of decisions which they later decided were REALLY questionable in terms of the security of programs. ES5 added a new mode, called "strict mode", which disabled these features. in “ordinary” JavaScript code, you have to opt into strict mode using what is called a “directive”. but when they added modules in ES6 (probably the most significant ES6 addition), they mandated that any code loaded as a module is unconditionally in strict mode. (you should always run javascript as a module if you can in the present day.)

to answer question 2, browsers don’t implement JavaScript by versions, they do it by features. so, for example, the JavaScript standard has mandated that browsers implement optimizations for “tail calls” (in ES6 i believe?) but only Safari ever did. however, many browsers have implemented lots of features from newer versions even though they didn’t implement that one and so technically don’t have full ES6 conformance. so you have to do a feature‐by‐feature comparison rather than being able to say “this browser completely supports this version”. (also there is more to browser javascript than ECMAscript; there is also the DOM which historically has willfully violated the ECMAscript spec in a few places even.) but there are websites which will do this comparison and list which features a browser supports (usually i think in terms of which test cases it passes/fails from a test suite).

@vaporeon_ @wallhackio they actually stopped using numbers but they’re on 15 (a·k·a EcmaScript 2024) right now; they release a new one each year

@wallhackio @vaporeon_ newer developments to the language, for example static blocks and private members in class declarations, are innovative and can’t be simply ported back to ES5 with the same semantics. but these weren’t a part of class declarations when they were originally introduced; people just lump them in the category of “ES6” because they associate them with post‐ES5 javascript. ES6 itself offered very little; even async/await (which are fundamental to modern JS) weren’t added until ES8.