[admissionsguy]

> solutions written in dynamic programming languages like PHP and Python are always woefully slow

True as it may be that they are slow, I doubt it's caused by the use of dynamic programming languages.

> The money should be secured immediately that cannot be touched by the upcoming governments. It should increase taxes. Independence has a price. We as Europeans should be ready to pay it.

You do you, but increasing taxes to build products to replace products built by private enterprise sounds like a 180 degree opposite of what Europe needs to prosper.

[bigfudge]

This is pre MAGA thinking. Investing in strategic industries that otherwise pose systemic risk to European economies wouldn’t be our first choice, but it’s now necessary.

[abtinf]

It’s called mercantilism. It was thoroughly refuted hundreds of years ago.

[braiamp]

Yes, but apparently the biggest players now abuse their comparative advantage positions. So, we are back to mercantilism to the detriment of all humanity.

[xedrac]

> I doubt it's caused by the use of dynamic programming languages.

Depends which ones. Python? Definitely a source of slowness.

[admissionsguy]

Hard imagining well designed web app bottlenecked by server-side processing that is not offloaded to database, or done via bindings to libraries written in compiled languages.

[consp]

> Definitely a source of slowness.

I would first blame the programmers, the design and lack of specialty offloading before blaming any programming language. Well designed web calls scale nearly linearly with usage and usually poor design or programming is the source of slowness. You can always trade language complexity for speed but assuming it is the cause of all perceived slowness is a poor man's view.

It is the same story every time again, first it was java, which has so many large scale projects most people won't even know it's running things they use, now it's apparently python who is to blame for all slowness on the web. When the next JIT or scripted language comes along which is not someone's favourite pet that will get the blame.

[array_key_first]

Python is slow, though, and so was java compared to other compiled languages of its time. Sure, it might not matter much if you're mostly doing database calls. If you're not, though, then yes, it's the languages fault if your app is slow. You can try to make it faster, but it's gonna be marginal gains. Or, you could just switch to another language and get a 100x speedup for free.

I also denounce the notion that trading language complexity for slowness is the case. Python is already complex, and there's some language and frameworks that are actually quite a bit easier to use for web backends. Like java, or dotnet. It just makes no sense to use python for this usecase, even if you ignore the slowness.

But that's not completely true, there is one very good reason to use python. Your devs know it. But, that doesnt say anything about the language itself.

[tinodb]

Slow_er_. For all programs talked about in this thread it is fast enough. Especially if you don’t need to host it at Microsoft/Google scale.

[mekoka]

Is this not a discussion about a web application? Order of magnitude matters. If Python is slower than Rust by 2 orders, but faster than IO by another 2 orders, are you not haggling just to shave off a few dimes on your 100 dollar bill?

[drnick1]

> True as it may be that they are slow, I doubt it's caused by the use of dynamic programming languages.

Yes it is. It's the same reason desktop GUI apps are now slower than Windows 95-era apps that were written in C.

[ericd]

It’s building infrastructure, which should lower costs in the long term. Seems like a good use of money from where I’m sitting.

[echelon]

> You do you, but increasing taxes to build products to replace products built by private enterprise sounds like a 180 degree opposite of what Europe needs to prosper.

Shhh, don't tell them.

(Kidding, of course.)

The best solution is skin-in-the-game, for-profit enterprise coupled with rigorous antitrust enforcement.

Companies will go a million times faster than open source. They're greedy and will tear the skin off of inefficiencies and eat them for lunch. That's what they do. Let the system of capitalism work for you. It's an optimization algorithm. One of the very best.

But when companies get too big and start starving off competition, that's when you need to declaw them and restore evolutionary pressure. Even lions should have to work hard to hunt, and they should starve and die with old age to keep the ecosystem thriving.

[roblabla]

> The best solution is skin-in-the-game, for-profit enterprise coupled with rigorous antitrust enforcement.

Don't we have enough examples showing that this simply cannot work long-term, because the for-profit enterprises will _inevitably_ grow larger than the government can handle through antitrust? And once they reach that size, they become impossible to rein in. Just look at all the stupid large american corporations who can't be broken up anymore because the corporation has the lobbying power and media budget to make any attempt to enforce antitrust a carrier killer for a politician.

I think it's very myopic to say that corporate structure is the "best solution".

[nickpp]

> to make any attempt to enforce antitrust a carrier killer for a politician

Any example of a politician carrier killed by an attempt to enforce antitrust?

[saubeidl]

Biden.

Him putting Lisa Khan in charge of antitrust enraged the tech oligarchs, who then all went MAGA and bought Trump the election.

[nickpp]

> went MAGA and bought Trump the election

Didn’t Harris actually raise and spend more than Trump on that election?

[saubeidl]

Yeah but the tech spend was way more effective. Elon took over Twitter.

[admissionsguy]

No a bad thing if you desire the corporate power to eventually become the main force shaping the world :)