"isn’t there a better way to speed up client side loads times without having to mix server side and client side code?"
You're not mixing them, you're using a javascript engine serverside to pre-run your client side js. There is still code separation and your back end doesn't have to be written in JS to accomplish this.
Separately the notion of "isomorphic javascript" if that's what it's called, is not to "mix" client and server code. It's 2 fold: 1 to take down the boundary between client and server code so that there is much re-use and code can just be "marked" as server or client only. 2) So that you can re-use many of your tools like libraries, testing, and language best practices across your whole project.
I think that boundary is important though. If you design your app correctly there won't be the need to rewrite code over the front and back. Also if your building an Android or iOS app you have to build that boundary. So why build the web frontend differently? They should all consume the same backend.
Of course there will probably be repeat code but I'd rather minimize that than try to make universal code.
You're thinking of the wrong boundary. You should definitely have a boundary for your data that is agnostic of the view code.
However, a web application is not like an iOS or Android application. It has a server-side that sends pre-rendered view code and it has a client-side that renders view code on the fly. It still makes sense to share the view code between the server and the client and it still allows for a separate data backend.
These systems are surprisingly easy to create and maintain with React.
In essence three things are supplied to a client. A pre-rendered view, raw data, and the code to turn the raw data in to the pre-rendered view.
OK that is where we diverge, i'm thinking no pre-rendered view. Ideally your frontend would be serving statically from lets say Amazon S3 and your api from another domain. Treat your frontend as if it were a mobile app. Now if you apply the data bootstrapping technique this can't happen totally but the only thing to do dynamically is insert some initial API data.
There is a difference between neovim favoring lua, and vim still existing. Plus their official stance is that vimscript is a worthy language for it's job and support for it isn't going anywhere.
Y'all are falling for it, this isn't an existing service, it's a hype page. The flight cost is just filler made to excite you, it will most certainly be much more, none of the links work, there is no app, no faq, no privacy policy. This isn't tech related, this isn't even a product announcement it's just straight hype advertising and y'all are falling for it. Links like this hitting the top of the front page and spurring 150 comments indicate quite comically to me the sunset of what was once an insightful, interesting technology news site.
Someone should invent a usb dongle that detects a nearby rfid chip that you keep on your keychain. As soon as that keychain is out of range, say 5 feet, the computer locks and encrypts itself. Integrate this into the computer and you wouldn't be able to tell who has one and who doesn't. Think you're being arrested with your computer open? Toss your keys.
You could be grabbed by agents and held there in your chair while another agent starts working on your files.
My idea would be more of a proximity sensor that not only does the RFID-walkaway thing, but also locks the machine up if anyone additional to yourself approaches the device.
But then the LEO agent sees this, and not only does he pick up the keys, he will then proceed to charge you with something for resisting arrest, or obstruction of justice or any of the myriad of ways they have to make your life a living hell.
I think this would be similar to smoking pot in a moving car, then getting a police car to tell you to stop and then you throw the drugs out the window. I believe that's enough of a reason to charge you with all sorts of nasty stuff.
That's my point. If you have your laptop locked depending on whether they are close by or not, then throwing the key away will not help you.
I was trying to say that it seems to me as an ineffective method. Just as ineffective as trying to argue with the police that since you don't have the drugs on you (because you just tossed them) you are not in trouble. The drugs don't disappear just as the keys won't, so the agents would just have to get the keys and unlock your laptop.
It'd be easier to just have the machine lock itself and power down whenever anyone plugged in an unknown HID device. The FBI (and other agencies) use USB mouse jigglers to keep the screensaver from activating while they transport the machine back to their lab.
that's called "security through obscurity". and sometimes it works great! Well, the first time.
Of course, just like the shoe bomber changed airport security forever, an rfid keyfob like you suggested becoming commonplace, would just lead to the cops immediately tazing and tackling you, and treating every single motion of your arms as an attempt to destroy evidence.
If you are under surveillance it's likely they would have observed this already. Don't assume they would go beyond removing all of your valuables and clothes right then and there if they thought this setup was in place.
Some of the above methods can still be broken. Requiring a face present? Why not just print a big blowup photo and quickly insert in front of camera?
It's hard to imagine they could simultaneously arrest and restrain a guy, while keeping him within 3 feet of his laptop, while preventing him from shutting the lid or locking the computer. Falling to the floor would be enough to break the connection and lock the computer.
If they're already in your house, then it's probably game over. Otherwise it should not be detectable to a third party observer that you have a small transmitter in your wrist bracelet.
That's not a bad idea. You could use
some kind of USB dongle connected to a wearable? Once you walk away from computer it takes a picture of the screen( looks like nothing is changed), but the computer immediately locks down everything except what's currently on the screen.
Only a password along with the wearable would unlock it? (It's probally not easily feasible, but it doesn't sound impossible?) "Oh, I scratched my head, and my computer hard drive shut down."
This doesn't solve any trust problems, there is still no guarantee that the ratings can't be covertly skewed. I don't need even more things messing with my text app and don't want anyone parsing my texts looking for restaurant names. My friends opinions of restaurants are not generally useful. I can't see if they have happy hour, wifi, or take credit cards with just 5 stars. Many restaurants have the same name. Restaurants are location dependent.
Ironically this would be most useful if it clicking on the rating took you to the yelp page so you could see the details, photos, menu, read reviews, and confirm that it is the actual restaurant you're talking about.
You're not mixing them, you're using a javascript engine serverside to pre-run your client side js. There is still code separation and your back end doesn't have to be written in JS to accomplish this.
Separately the notion of "isomorphic javascript" if that's what it's called, is not to "mix" client and server code. It's 2 fold: 1 to take down the boundary between client and server code so that there is much re-use and code can just be "marked" as server or client only. 2) So that you can re-use many of your tools like libraries, testing, and language best practices across your whole project.