fireflash38

The churn is rewriting 50+ line comments on every function. These comments will also include every place that references this function, as well as random historical data.

You can backload via generator plugged in. Nothing physically stopping it. You just would need to shut off the primary breaker so you don't load the line outside of your house.

The solar is the same way, but with an auto cutoff.

If it isn't an informed decision, it isn't really a decision at all. And the huge majority of people the huge majority of the time do not want to make an informed decision: they want what they came to the site for, news, games, family photos, etc.

You go to Facebook to see your cute nephew make spit bubbles. Do you care that they access your camera and canvas? What is a canvas? And sure access my camera, I want to upload photos!

It's fundamentally broken. They've studied the dark patterns, not to avoid them but to implement them best.

I think they'll keep cheap consumer electronics for the most part. Not as cheap as this last decade, but still cheap. They just want to control the entire software chain from boot to network-accessed resources.

Are you human? Then you must verify it from a "trusted computer", preferably with your driver's license. Gets governments and corporations as much information as they want, along with a guarantee that you can't "steal" their content and can't avoid their ads.

To the common man, there is no real difference between tax evasion and tax "optimization". Especially since the people who most use those "optimizations" often have excessive impact on the writing of the tax code in the first place!

It's the same critiques that come up with taxing the rich. "Oh people will just evade it". Cool then nail them then. Or if they all want to move to tiny tax shelters then tax them when they move their money there.

They want you to believe it's not possible to restrict them so that you don't try.

Intent matters.

You cannot reasonably create a law that covers all situations in their entirety. Even if you could, it would become obsolete the second it's in effect

Do you understand every part of your dependencies now, pre-AI?

I see it kind of like baking/cooking. Do you bake your bread from scratch? Do you grow your own wheat and grist your own flour?

I think over reliance on it or not even trying to understand what is happening is a big problem to be sure, but it's certainly not a new problem.

He's right about interest rates. But he's missing the point behind the debate: whose policy choices got us to where we are today where this is necessary? Republicans.

Not just Trump, Republicans as a whole. They are not fiscally conservative at all, and their culture wars and religious crusades are going to bankrupt the nation.

They'll sell you up a rope to corporate donors asking for deregulation. And we've seen exactly what happens when there is money to be made at the expense of other people's lives: spoiler alert, people like money more than they care about other people's health.

Why is it necessary to legislate it if it's nonsense? If there is no culpability, why would there be any threat?

It's astoundingly trivial to abuse.

If people could imagine it being used against them, maybe they might understand. Like labeling the Republican party a terrorist organization because they sponsored Jan 6 insurrectionists.

> If you use git for packages, then your repo becomes the package boundary. You no longer have the option of producing multiple packages from one repo, or even one package from multiple repos.

What does this even mean?

I'd argue that having the source to build the thing is more important than the artifacts. Release artifacts are more of a convenience. If the thing doesn't build from the source given, what use is it?

It makes it more accepted, because if everyone is doing it why wouldn't I do it?

Report that shit to your security officer

Their dining tables are pretty much all solid pine.

I think having my career be started in testing has broken my brain. Having seen so many different failure scenarios, it makes actual development difficult. Failure handling in particular is exceptionally difficult, especially when you're hitting low level filesystem errors.

If you can't write to the filesystem, almost everything you do in an embedded system will fail. So you can't undo a partial write. Your logging will probably fail too.

A relatively big database (a tier 2/3 database) that I was using handled this in a really bad manner: it'd just segfault. Depending on when this happened you could get data corruption and never be able to open the DB even in read-only mode.

It's one of the core principles of a database! And it didn't even do that correctly.

People are lazy. If you give people an easy way to "fill that void" they will do so, even if it's detrimental to their long term health.

No social media? People will still find ways to socialize. It might not be as easy, but they will do it. Maybe you'll even see a resurgence in social clubs.

I think it's hilarious how AI took something personal and the very first thing it spews out is a classic AI-ism.

Do you read over what the AI spits out? Do you read over what you write?

It takes time to do either, and both are the things that I think are actually useful.

I think reading and writing test code is harder than the underlying code itself. You must know both the desired behavior of the code-under-test and whether the test correctly stresses that behavior. And then if you're working on anything more complicated than a single unit test you must also make sure that it doesn't blow up anything adjacent to it (preserve state).

I think enforcing black box testing is the best way to get useful tests out of both humans and robots. They must not know the internals, or it will lead them to do bad things.

Stale closing bugs is the worst.

Just because someone moved on from your broke ass product doesn't mean the bug was fixed. I can't count how many times I'll find an old bug still there years later closed with 5+ duplicate issues all linked back to the same closed github issue that was closed as stale.

It's just bullshit. Having a lower count on your issue tracker doesn't make the actual bugs disappear folks

I think it can be pretty hard. It can be hard to find the right fit/abstractions.

LLMs don't fix that though. I see some truly awful code come out of them. And no, it's not just better context or use more skillz.md.

It's not about kids imo. They're purposely designing things to be as addicting as possible. To me, that is morally wrong, akin to what gambling and "prediction" markets do. Beyond morals, I think it creates deep problems in society, beyond just "who owns the thing recommending" (seriously. If you're not ok with Trump or Kamala Harris controlling what you watch, why are you ok with a nameless exec doing it?)

I find it a rather offensive that the suburbs don't have walking/bike path cut-throughs. They're cheap. They can cut down on non-car travel by a ton. They're just damn nice.

XP and 7 were only good because it was based off of 2000/NT.

A lot of rural areas you really just gotta discount the ratings, both on Google maps and yelp.

Why not? Ive been doing it for years, when I worked in office. Get someone to go with you. Or walk to get food/coffee/whatever.

It's written by AI

Does it matter? When has capitalism cared about fair or free

I think you'll find as soon as you codify something strict, people will do their absolute best to work around those rules in any way possible.

The onus is on you to prove the claim that AI is equivalent or better.

But if you're not a troll, from the very fucking start of it there was a boom of products. Like it's practically the definition of it. Are you seriously thinking that they just burned a bunch of coal for fun?