Here's a nickel, kid. Go read about the other parts of the world, where people aren't as coddled, and a 2-second HTTP request isn't astonishingly slow.
341 karma · joined August 4, 2024
The main difference (and I think, the real argument against Fascism for Innovation™) is that all these innovations were created for the explicit purpose of turning human beings into minced meat as efficiently as possible.
This is not ideal, even from the point of view of the innovator. As much as you want to be able to move fast, your investors will demand faster results -- or someone who'll provide them.
I think.
It's fast, compiles to native code AND javascript, and has garbage collection (so no manual memory management).
As an added bonus, you can mix Haskell-like functional code and imperative code in a single function.
Influx is basically the same niche.
Sadly, the answer is that you can't.
Qntm's other works are criminally underrated.
Lastly, my score is 4/9? What does it mean?
In the C++ community (as lots of other things are), rejecting `#pragma once` is a long-standing tradition of worshipping the decaying body of prehistoric compilers for
It's unclear what benefits this approach has achieved, but don't disturb it, or else.
Not really, no. For example, if you drive into the wall, you may die.
Another experience that feels like death is working in a company that implements on-call rotations.
It would be too easy to draw out a parallel between how you approach a free fanfiction website (the website should mystically owe you five 9's uptime) and the mentality that metastased in the industry.
Instead, I'm gonna take this opportunity to point out that the AO3 downtime affected you, as a non-user, enough to vitrify the admin, where hardcore users laughed it off (because they're not entitled toddlers).
I'll give some context, though.
- I use OCaml and Python/SQL, on two different projects.
- Both are single-person.
- The first project is a real-time messaging system, the second one is logging a bunch of events in an SQL database.
In the first project, Claude has been... underwhelming. It casually uses C idioms, overabuses records and procedural programming, ignores basic stuff about the OCaml standard library, and even gave me some data structures that slowed me down later down the line. It also casuallyies about what functions does.
A real example: `Buffer.add_utf_8_uchar` adds the ASCII representation of an utf8 char to a buffer, so it adds something that looks like `\123\456` for non-ascii.
I had to scold Claude for using this function to add an utf8 character to a Buffer so many times I've lost count.
In the second project, Claude really shined. Making most of the SQL database and moving most of the logic to the SQL engine, writing coherent and readable Python code, etc.
I think the main difference is that the first one is an arcane project in an underdog language. The second one is a special case of a common "shovel through lists of stuffs and stuff them in SQL" problem, in the most common language.
You basically get what you trained for.
Not fixed, covered up.
> let's not freak out - you can't "steal" open-source code, they used an incompatible license. that was accidentally too free.
What a poetic formulation? In reality, they deleted history and they put a license that allows the "freedom" to let them monetize the code. I wonder how's the original author more free with this license? How is anyone more free? Sounds like the license was "accidentally" "too free" in a way that only made themselves more free.
> people monetizing something you open-source isn't stealing.
It's, in fact, the precise definition when the open-source project uses the GPLv3 license.
It's also much more stimulating to build something than ask like a pedant "why this exists when Syncthing?", so, I guess the joke's on them.
Ironically, one of the biggest point raised against this Brave New Internet is its infantilizing and "managed" way of treating the user. You should probably read the original article -- it makes this point very clearly.
How so? More specifically, if I compile the same version as the launcher, can I play on most servers?
Repeat after me: The server matters. A lot. Even if you don't want it to.
Signal's way to validate that a session isn't man-in-the-middle'd is the same as XMPP: You have to validate the session's fingerprint in real life, or over another secure channel, by scanning each other's QR code, a procedure we'll refer to as "the QR thing".
Over more than five years of Signal usage, I personally did this exactly twice.
Now, we can start to imagine the typical Signal user.
Either we consider that I'm a minority and at least the vast majority of people do "the QR thing", so most/all sessions are secure from any man-in-the-meddling.
But then, you present the argument that XMPP is insecure because it can send plaintext. So this imaginary Signal user would be careful and privacy-inclined enough to use "the QR thing", but too careless to keep OMEMO on his XMPP client (where it's on by default in the vast majority) !?
I can't imagine this user. I fail.
The other way to reason about this is that, just like me, no one does "the QR thing". The vast majority of sessions are not protected against an MITM. Note that "the QR thing" is identical on XMPP, so all previous criticisms apply, except for a key difference...
On XMPP, servers are small. Trust is diluted, and in a lot of cases, you know personally your administrator, if you're not tech-oriented, because your administrator is the guy who told you about it.
Even when it doesn't matter, the server does matter a bit, eh?
It sounds quite cyclical. They dislike Marcan because they're alt-right users leeching off this community's reputation, which is obvious because they dislike Marcan.
The people on the link you sent, they, uh, have a long comment history. No one is being "pretend-part" of the community here. Or am I missing some context?