I often have to ask myself if I’m asking for something different because of preference or need. I don’t really know what others are doing but I see this comment a lot about needing to always correct agents. I can’t figure out if it’s an exaggeration or not because once I’ve planned how I want something done I pretty much have zero need to intervene.
I don’t think anyone thinks gun control was passed to help school kids. People have been begging the govt to pass stricter gun control laws to protect kids for decades with very little success.
The article does say that he’s already given away this amount of money since the founding of Craigslist 30 years ago. From the sound of things he’s always actively doing philanthropic work, but I could be reading into it too much.
The key distinction here is that the temporary workers would presumably be people who are in federal custody and currently housed in ICE facilities. The temporary housing isn’t the issue.
I think the terrifying part is just how fast software practitioners completely gave up trying to understand anything. As if these oracles actually know anything about our bespoke systems. It was almost overnight that SMEs were lost.
I think authentication is about proof of identity. Identity can mean a lot of things imo. Applications identify me all the time without me giving them any proof of who I am. This happens in meatspace all the time too. People project identity and we make assumptions about what we observe. We don’t necessarily ask them to verify this identify through mutually agreed upon terms.
Second the room treatment. It should likely be prioritized over everything. Specifically you should look into getting bass traps and a gobo or three. There’s budget stuff out there but sound is fickle. Control those reflections. Expensive mics still sound bad if a room sounds bad.
I’ve had limited success with the null object pattern but there is one case that it worked really well for me. I worked on a feature that was highly dynamic and users could compose reports selecting data points from tangentially related models. Null objects were a really helpful pattern because it was hard to anticipate how models would be composed and if a developer made a mistake it was hard to notice there was no effect. Our null objects would raise exceptions in development and explain what you need to change but wouldn’t prevent execution in production.
You could easily argue we should have just presented this exception to the user in all cases but this is where we landed. It’s probably the only case this pattern was beneficial for me.
I’m trying to recall a time in my career where I’ve heard this phrase and it was actually a technical problem. Most of the time this is a dismissive response that is more political than it is technical. And let’s be honest — we’re the ones inventing the architecture of the applications. If a feature is desired but it “conflicts with the architecture” then you figure out how to resolve the conflict.
> It’s not about the wisdom we glean. It’s about what wisdom we grow.
I think the author does a good job of actually testing the original point—questioning if all but a handful of books are a worthless distraction. I think the entire piece has almost nothing to do with prayer. The monks are used as a thought experiment around the value of thought for the sake of thought.
Do you have any sources on birders directly causing extinction? I think it’s absolutely wild that someone in that profession would drive a species to extinction just to draw it so I’m curious to read more.
I was in a meeting to talk about our logging strategy at an old company that was starting micro services and experiencing this problem. In the meeting I half heartedly suggested we write the main lib in C and write a couple wrapper libs for the various languages we were using. At the time it felt kinda insane but in hindsight it probably would have been better than the logging mess we created for ourselves.
But can it stand to an exceptional puddle? Pretty sure no one is contesting that they can drive their Tesla in the rain. The question is if you live in a place that has outlier weather from where it was tested is the manufacturer responsible for their product?
I don’t mind code reviews so I’m not really defending who you’re replying to. There is another way to think about this tho and I actually have found this practice to be light years more effective than code reviews. Where I work we have a practice where before you start doing a ton of work on your card/ticket you should find someone on your team, explain the problem to them, and show them how you’re going to do the work. This gives your teammates an opportunity to give you feedback before anyone has done anything, and you can both poke holes in design decisions before anyone has done anything they feel strongly about. If you do this process 95% of code reviews are pretty much worthless.
I'll admit I started skimming about half way but did the author actually make any real proposal on how to address poverty? As far as I can tell they just hand-waved away the poor by suggesting just start a business? I'm not sure if that's a fair assessment or not.
Like all lisps it is niche. I don’t use scheme but have used Common Lisp and clojure for a few years. Racket has a thriving community as far as I can tell. You just don’t see lisp much in the wild but it’s there.
Nah I think the OP post still works here. You might have requirements of a car that only some niche manufacturer can meet because you have a very specific problem to solve. Let’s say you’re in a wheelchair and you need a vehicle that is accessible for you. Your solution you’re paying for is more specific than others.
My wife couldn’t sleep after giving birth to our second kid and it spiraled quickly into full blown psychosis. My wife still can’t sleep right nearly 10 years later.
There’s no shame in taking antidepressants. Some of us have brains that don’t work quite right and we should have more options than “cope” or self terminate.
Another aspect is that you could actually find these sites in the past. I have vague recollections of spending hours going through a bunch of garbage to find some goldmine Web 1.0 site. I don’t remember the last time I found an old site like these
In this case there isn’t a lot you can do. If a bad actor is going to spend a lot of time gaining your trust and doing good before they do bad how do you vet that? You either have to maintain full control forever or you have accept this possibility. The OP does mention that this might be a bad idea if your project has any level of security.
I’d even add that LLMs not only give nothing back to content creators it’s also taking from them. Thieves had to do actual work to steal ideas from people in the past so the barrier to entry was high. Now I can have an LLM plagiarize people and run it through a synonym tool and publish it without doing much of anything.