Advent of Clod @wallhackio@cat.family

not enough for playing videogames to out of the question but just enough to still be annoying

so it's one of the slight-headache-the-entire-day type days

@amy amy!! ​ 🤠

i love being Fucking Wrong about something

@Lady @Satsuma ah indeed.

@Lady @Satsuma it is so cool that i had a fundamental misunderstanding of a language i loved that is really cool

@aescling @Lady @Satsuma why are you booing me dumpass i'm literally right

@Lady @Satsuma okay let me clarify my confusion then. If I have a value of number type I can call Object.getPrototypeOf on that number and get the Number.prototype object.

I can call methods and access properties on the number as well.

In general things we call primitives in JavaScript has property access and is in a prototype chain (although now that I think about it im sure undefined and null don't fit into this).

I was under the impression that values are containers for information that allow property access semantics, and that all values in the language participate in this, and the language makes a very poor decision of overloading the term "object" to simultaneously refer to one of 1) the fundamental container type that (all?) values in JavaScript are 2) non-null types that typeof tells you are "object" 3) instances of ES6 classes

@Lady @Satsuma are there technically some values that aren't objects? I thought it was objects all the way down

@Lady @Satsuma hey @aescling I want you to suffer through this as well.

@Lady @Satsuma Here, have a transcription of the most appalling part of the video:

Author: "And why is nearly everything an object? Why is Strings objects? Why are numbers objects? They're just numbers. Like I get that it's for method but does NaN need to be an object?"

[screen shows author using the node.js REPL calling the valueOf method of NaN]

Author: "Why would anyone want to get the value of something that explicitly states it isn't a number?"

[Cut to screenshot of freecodecamp.org's description of JavaScript which claims that "JavaScript is not a class-based object-oriented language".]

Author: "Any many argue that JavaScript isn't object-oriented."

[cut to screenshot of towardsdatascience.com's description of JavaScript which claims that "Nearly everything in JavaScript is an object".]

Author: "Looks pretty-object oriented to me... And why is that functions are also classes? That's what [ES6] classes are for."

@aescling movie theatres are now playing special messages before the movie starts specifically requesting that the audience does not trash the theatre during the chicken jockey scene

Just a saw video of an audience for the Minecraft movie lighting fireworks indoors during the chicken jockey scene

@Lady send link again pls

@Lady no

@Satsuma @Lady 'tis a video

hi @Lady i just got rage-baited by some very poor javascript criticism would you also like to be annoyed by it

physics is an objectively terrible field because the quantum mechanics textbook with a cat on it is somehow my least favorite quantum book i have read

@Satsuma @aescling @coriander im sorry but it was a statement uttered from pure vibes. there is no logic, no reasoning. if you dont understand then You Just Dont Get It.

@amy chatgpt is often wrong but it cannot be any wronger than my own expectations regarding hitboxes