ivanleoncz

No, indeed they don't.

"climbing up ladders and acquiring power"

He urgently came to the previous administration along with a committee, presenting a plan for the construction of Nuclear Power Plants, focused on serving datacenters for AI, with the excuse that, if the US don't do this, China will do, and he or his team not even consulted the IAEA for this topic.

He might have a point but, still looks like the Salesperson of a Insurance company. The idea is not absurd, but the approach and the speech, seems quite cheap.

I see nothing on his talks that are genuine about solving crucial problems of the humanity...

Clear to me that he's very into keeping the costumer (investors) satisfied.

I understand. There might be great reasons to not step up and say what is wrong, even when the truth is obvious...

Not the objective of the post but, it still creeps me out that, we don't have on Linkedin, a space to say what what it's (undoubtly) wrong.

It's part of our daily lives as workers, to say that we have an elephant in the room, even if it's with a company and it's eerie intentions towards the humanity, just to please shareholders and keep its value in the stock market.

Sometimes I think we are in a kind of civilization downgrade, but no one wants to talk about it. This initiative by Sam, proves my (not so wacky) theory.

Funny though is that if you share this kind of stuff on Linkedin, people just look away. Indeed, it's not a place to say what you think: it's all about look nice and please anyone who's capable of giving you a job, even if it's some Big Tech dictator.

The dataset is pretty interesting, although scary. I'll end up creating a notebook then using some pandas over it. Something to study, indeed.

It's funny but, it kind of makes sense...

For sure, gun control is something much needed on the US, for the sake of both nations, for the sake of Central America too.

You're not contributing with the quality of this space, by sharing such comment, and using the "whore" word here.

Karma Whore? That's how you speak with people trying to share contents here? Does that does in favor of the rules then? Buddy, I feel bad for you. I hope you may have someone to love you on this Sunday, for you really need it. Don't be like that. Have a good day.

Would you mind to explain your point, please? I'd be glad to learn more about it, for so far, I cannot agree with your comment, based on hands-on testing and documentations. Thanks.

Me too, thanks. Would be nice if you can share some articles that you wrote regarding the matter, so I can have more inspiration. Looking forward to read them and learn from different examples and not the same "boiler plate" example that you can find on any DBMS documentation.

I'm sorry, but you're wrong...

In Postgresql, the default ISOLATION LEVEL is "READ COMMITTED", which by standard, allows "NON-REPEATABLE READ" phenomena.

When Transaction on the LEFT is COMMITTED (adding 100 to balance), the Transaction on the RIGHT will add 400 to a balance of 1100, and not to a balance of 1000 (reading NON-REPEATED value).

You can do better than leaving this kind of comment that does not contribute in anything.

Have good weekend.

I don't get your comment, to be quite honest. Besides, I don't like 3rd party A.I. services: the content that you see, is the content that I wrote. And this comment of yours seems more of something to offend than to contribute. I feel bad for you.

Generally I say: "let's make a good effort, to not let a bug pop-up on the user's face." Hehehe.

Particularly, I love documentation. Doesn't need to be a gigantic comment at the beginning of each function/method, but the Business Rule that the code is about, must be explained. Without this, maintaining and improving a code base for whatever service, might be a 'seek 'n hide' + 'riddle' game, and to be honest, I don't like it, at all.

Logging is a good thing too, essentially, if the application is on debug mode. Makes life much easier for gigantic code bases.

Since a gray-beard guy mentioned these four, they make more sense to me, who have a black-beard, yet.

Cheers,

Or maybe, because I care about: - Who am I working to? - Who am I serving? - Who are the persons that I'm working with?

Or maybe, I'm curious about the language that your face brings when you said things like: * "Business is stable. Don't worry." * "Good job team." * "We need an extra effort from you guys. This is not about money. It's about our mission"

I definitely agree. If integration and teamwork is required, how would it be possible, if you never saw the face of your partners? I mean, good code is what makes the difference, but still, we are not machines. There's a layer of communication between us, that shouldn't be ignored, which is a part of the bound that a team should have. Just my opinion. Thanks for sharing this, Osiris.

You're right. My Android smartphone as well asks for my interactions in order to allow data transfer, but who knows. I wouldn't take the risk. What I'd recommend, is to have a "USB condom" (charge-only), in order to ensure physically (besides logically, like you mentioned), that there will be no chance of juicing my data.

Serveless is a sort of a trap. Maybe a good thing for teams who do not have System Engineers, SREs, SysAdmins, etc., due its pragmatism and less cost of operation and maintaining, but its a blackbox: you don't know exactly what's going on and besides that, you don't know if it is really secure. Have to really measure the trade-offs of having and not having this technology on your environment. Don't get caught by the buzzword, and try to really understand, benefits and non-benefits of this approach.

Raw and revealing.

As I was reading the article, I started to wonder: is this the Holy Grail of everyone who wants to be disruptive, creative, productive, etc., when it comes to work with tech products?

IMHO, independently of "the hat that one might be wearing", this "Zen of Star-ups" is too much (unnecessary). Dozens of companies forcing this way of life (snacks, beer, parties, video-games, etc.), creating a "cool world", when in fact, it is not. There are investments and decisions affecting the direction of a product (which must be successful for the sake of everyone). There is no paradise in this scenario. This is too serious. Instead of all this "blablabla", why not just keep a serious and cooperative environment? The "Zen of Startup" is a trap (most of the time). Sounds like a lack of reality, which could be addressed by a simple set of values between employer and employees:

- honesty, cooperation, productivity, good compensations and missions

Throw away beers, snacks, spas, video-games, etc. These five things above, are solid enough for a sustainable work environment, and things doing great or not, there's no "Never Land" feeling (no illusion).

Someone has the money, and you might the have the skills that she/he wants. Period. K.I.S.S.

This kind of technology, used by the government without serious restrictions, it's pretty bad and the article describes by itself, situations where it was "not exactly used" to solve crimes, but for monitoring data traffic of cellphones used by people engaged in protests.

However, what scares me the most, is the possibility of such technology falling in the hands of those who are playing dirty 100% of the time, against the society (criminals, mafia, gangs, drug lords, kidnappers, terrorists, etc.).