roguecoder

I feel like just making kids lie about our age was pretty effective back in the day. Those of us who lied knew we were going into adult spaces, hid our irl identities, and learned how to behave.

Then Facebook convinced people social media was supposed to be about your "real" identity, which made us sitting ducks for scammers and propaganda. Now we have governments demanding we provide our identity papers before we are allowed to participate.

We could get back to that world with anti-trust enforcement and mandatory licensing, while still keeping whatever positive effects competition has had on content production (which I think are debatable at best: it seems like no one outside of low-budget stuff like Dropout is making anything interesting in the US right now.)

That has not been my experience with those tools.

Super-procedural code in particular is too complex for humans to follow, much less AI.

Or overworked.

We can deploy on Fridays. We don't, because we aren't donating our time to the shareholders.

They've always been flakey. At least these only impacted their own customers instead of taking down the internet.

Akamai manages it.

The deploys are very unlikely to be managed from the same system.

This is Cloudflare. They've repeatedly broken DNS for years.

Looking across the errors, it points to some underlying practices: a lack of systems metaphors, modularity, testability, and an reliance on super-generic configuration instead of software with enforced semantics.

Yep: it is wild for them to claim that a strongly-typed language would have saved them when it didn't.

Relying on language features instead of writing code well will always eventually backfire.

I notice that this is the kind of thing that solid sociable tests ought to have caught. I am very curious how testable that code is (random procedural if-statements don't inspire high confidence.)

Costco had a deal on solid-state UPS & solar panels a while back that I was happy to partake of

A functioning FTC sure would.

Too bad business hated Lina Khan's basic anti-trust enforcement so much they decided to throw in with fascism.

As long as David Zaslav is kicked to the curb instead of given power inside Netflix, this could still be a win for the world. I don't know how else we were going to get him out of there.

Heck, Netflix might actually promote Our Flag Means Death!

(HBO being so terrible at modern promotion is what ultimately got them to this place. I found multiple series I really enjoyed there, but always by total accident scrolling alphabetically. The first time I ever saw a promotion for Warrior was when it came to Netflix.)

That's what governance is for, though. These laws can be changed to require collaboration or remove the artificial monopolies.

They haven't been because the people being hurt by it are way less organized than the people benefitting, not because things couldn't ever change.

Much like local control of zoning, that is an principle that many folks take on faith as being "good" despite all the actual outcomes.

In collaborative productions it is almost never the "individual" artist anyway: it's whatever giant conglomerate bought whatever giant conglomerate that paid everyone involves as little as the union would let them get away with.

Disobeying unjust laws is a moral imperative. Working around laws that hurt society is good for society. Changing laws that aren't benefiting society is the sign of a functioning government.

Copyright has never been about benefitting consumers. Or artists, for that matter.

It was invented to protect publishers (printing press operators). That continues to be who benefits from copyright. It's why Disney is behind all the massive expansion of copyright terms in the last hundred years.

Hoarding is never good for society. It is wild that we've adopted laws to reward it.

That would also solve the problem of AI training data. Build a data set, wait 14 years, and it's guaranteed to be legal.

This is why zoning should never have been made a local question.

People who want to live in the area but can't because it is unaffordable don't get a vote, and the exclusionary communities become self-reinforcing.

But Americas really, really like being racist, so now our housing market is f'ked.

Living on the street sucks. It is painful. It is a lot harder to stop using pain killers when one is in actual pain.

Interestingly, churches are one of the ways you still could, given that when zoning conflicts with practice of a religion zoning often has to give way. Get some folks with development experience and start a Hospitaller order.

American-style zoning is illegal in Japan: https://urbankchoze.blogspot.com/2014/04/japanese-zoning.htm...

All zoning is at the national level, with none of the opportunities for NIMBYs to keep new people out of their communities. Shops and offices are permitted in "residential" zones, and rather than specifying what is allowed zoning only specifies what is not permitted.

It can also be incredibly dangerous in the event of fires.

This is part of the advantage of SROs: every person has their own space, with a locking door.

Fentanyl came around decades after the zoning changes targeting these.

Not necessarily. I have a stew place by me that is $12 for a plate of veggies + meat that is easily two meals for me. There are plenty of food trucks around with good options in the $5-10 range. And that's before we're looking at stuff from a bodega.

Tech workers are prime targets for SROs, and it is wild that zoning has kept them out. I have had plenty of coworkers who ate the vast majority of their meals at work anyway and only used their kitchen to store clothes.

This portrays them just as an option for poor people, but if they were legal we would have high-end SROs also, for people who want high-end amenities but don't need giant amounts of space. Removing them hurts the people without other options the most, but zoning has hurt everyone's options.

That's interesting: it reminds me of the results we're seeing from workplace democracy in Germany.

Companies with workers on their boards are significantly less likely to go bust than companies where only investors' opinions matter.

But of course, whenever someone else's opinion matters, investors use their wealth to try to change that. Rich people seem to prefer worse outcomes as long as they get to be in charge.

Frameworks are a major contributor to these dynamics, which is a little unfair to blame on the language, but I've seen orders of magnitude difference.

I had one time it was faster for the three of us to rewrite a web app in Rails than to make the Play framework accomplish what we wanted it to accomplish, even though none of the three of us had ever worked in Ruby before. Rewriting four months of work took two weeks because Rails neatly supported what we were doing and so much could be generated. We ended up with better test coverage too.