TrayKnots said It is enforced all wrong. After all, how much money do I waste on a feature for naught point zero zero etc. one percent of my customer base?
How would enforcement really work? Well, require an open API. All information there. And it must be free to use for everyone who uses this API to add accessibility.
Because accessibility is not the same. It is different for someone who has Parkinson to someone who is blind to someone who is dyslexic. That allows for special versions and companies specialized into making other products accessible, allows for a better interconnected web and frees me, the company owner, from caring about the .0000001% of customer base when I wouldn't even think it is economical to add something to my web app just because 1% of my users want it.,Average defecation is quite varied. Between 3 times a day and once every 3 days is considered normal.
6 times a day sounds excessive. But there is the story they told us in the third year of med school. There is no story, I never went to med school.,That last thing, that make intuitive sense to my gamer brain. Back to the respawn point.
Hmm... The meta studies on gamers and violence came back with no indication for increased violence.
Maybe it is time to make a study if gamers on hard drugs are more prone to violence than non-gamers on hard drugs.,@retoor Yea, that makes a lot of sense. Backlinks. Good point.,@Demolishun
@jestdotty
You two are cute. Yea, as I said, it is 99% accurate. There are exceptions. Those are rare. Highschool genetics are not wrong, they are only mostly correct.
Dark hair or eyes are dominant. Meaning you can hide a recessive blonde gene in them without expressing it. It doesn't work the other way around. Gingers are just blondes with an MCR1 defect. So, your kids are fine.
Are my observations absolutely certain? No. Beyond any reasonable doubt. Yea.
Oh, by the way. Genes are terribly hard to define. Different papers use different definition. They aren't as try cut as base pairs or alleles. Richard Dawkins usually preferred information unit, while many others use information unit with locality. Sometimes I have even seen allele = gene definitions.,It's not the extension, it is in the main.js file or what it is called and only on debug builds, not on release builds. Quite handy actually.,I strife to be the idiot in my team.,I always am amazed about the amount of <<insert OS>> is so buggy posts.
I mean, I have worked in OSX and found it stable. I work mostly in Linux and the amount of people explaining to me that my OS of choice is unusable is baffling. I just migrated from i3 to KDE. Just because I wanted a change. Will probably migrate back in a month or so, knowing me. Happy with both. I just love how it feels different.
I also run Windows systems. And they are fine in their usability. Even the infamous Windows 8 was fine in usability.
I wonder if people are not flexible enough to adjust their work flow to the system provided... But on the other end, I end up writing scripts to make my workflow easier...
Or it is that they have confirmation bias, finding a bug, and then focusing on it more...
Or maybe... just maybe... You're just shit out of luck. Bad luck?
I don't know, but I tend to lean towards the confirmation bias hypothesis.,But why?
Making an automatic workflow is a two hour time investment?
On something like that, back when I couldn't just decide on my own, I usually invest the time after hours, tell my lead I have something that I think they will like, but if they take it they have to give me that time back in off-time and just go home earlier next Friday.
Having it already done means no long debates on technology and for juniors, it means you understand actually what you're asking for. Sometimes tasks like this are bigger than they look.,So, zero padding was the problem and AI was the solution you came up with?
Our species is lost, isn't it?,@retoor
I think you do not understand.
I used immich. immich had a container name preset "postgres" for its postgres database. It also had service name preset "database".
Somewhere inside of immich it has a database string that defaulted to: DATABASE_URL=http:////
I said, this is a stupid default. It means just one postgres db on it. They could have used the service name, that wouldn't have these limitations.
DATABASE_URL=http:////
It is in the "depends_on", service name would be recognized. Don't set a container name this generic as a default anyway, it has to be unique. Just leave it away and use the service name as a default. That would have been just fine.
But that was what immich did and it is a pain in the arse to debug someone's docker setup when it is not documented right, hence the rant.,Human value is both objective and a luxury good.
The objective human value emerges in emergency situations. Only five more spots on the arc? A doctor is more useful than a nurse. The doctor can figure out the nurse's job.
Yet, in a society that is not threatened by imminent destruction, value will be extended to everyone. It is a luxury good a society develops when it is going well.,@Hazarth
I disagree about it's the people's right.
Not being able to escape political spaces is the cost of democracy and politics-free spaces have cost us democracy.,Come on Kiki, you're a programmer. Automate. Write a program that doesn't eat for you while you go and have a buffet.,Does this have anything to do with the Facebook labels Linux and Distrowatch as malware?,@djsumdog
Thanks for the links. I read through both of your articles and yes, egregious. We two probably strongly disagree on the vaccines, but it should be allowed to be said and we should be allowed to have a heated debate on it.
When did the quote,
'I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,' become a heterodox opinion, as you so aptly put it.
Side note. I don't stand 100% behind the quote. I want everyone to say their piece, but I wouldn't defend it to my death. To mild social struggle, probably. Far more reasonable.,@Hazarth
Because those are the places with the staunchest defenders of an opinion. Those people invested.
Look, if we put two political opinions on a spectrum. Only two parties, say democrats and republicans:
D-------d--|--r--------R
The pipe is the line where some would vote for the one or the other parties, the letters are example voters.
In those political spaces, you will find D and R. The problem, d is actually closer to r than they are to D. And vice versa. But those two don't meet, or when they do, they agree not to speak about politics. They never even realize that this is the opinion of the other. For d, a republican looks like R. And for r, a democrat looks like D.
This is what echo chambers do.
That's the echo chamber argument. There is also the argument of democratic responsibility. Yet, I run out of characters. Tell me if you're interested.
Anyway, the middle dies, we hate each other, we cannot speak to each other.,@BordedDev
It is no use. Cannot escape zealots. Because if you do, the only people still visible are zealots.
It might be code not to get your discord banned, but it destroys democracy nonetheless.
The thing that I believe most people have not understood is that your vote matters little in democracy. Your voice matters. The fact that you can argue and convince people who make the decisions. And you know who make the decision? Those with a vote.
So, if you were given a vote, you have lost the right to close off your ears. Yet, that's not the narrative that people who rely on you being ill-informed are spinning. They tell you it is your right to close yourself off. But democracy comes with duties. And debating is one of them. Simply because otherwise, the system does not work.,@BordedDev
I consider democracy failed and doomed to fail from the beginning, a system that cannot work and we should give it up. Not because I do not like democracy, but because even when confronted with simple arguments, smart sounding responses will be brought that justify why democracy is not a duty. Why it is okay not to engage. And why not voting is supposed to be a form of protest.
If it is protest, then only against democracy itself.
The staunchest defenders of democracy are its doom bringers. In a way, tragic. But it is long dead. Buried even deeper by the fact that even pointing this disconnect out does not lead to any realizations.,Well... Hope you'll start eating again soon. I am no medical professional, but I hope you looked into stuff like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Just starting to eat again might be really dangerous to you. But I don't know enough to start eating again safely. At least not precisely. Do your research.,@BordedDev
I don't even believe in the best system we got. It is chaotic. Based on advertisement. People don't even know what a laocracy is. How can you grow up in a democracy and not be educated about a laocracy? How can you learn about stuff like demonstrations and not be asked by your social science highschool teacher if that is laocratic or democratic?
No, I am not convinced it is the best possible system. It is a system in which the king can hide. And we're fed those lines.,Hah, yea, impossible.
I once wrote a manual for our product. It included references to docker. They did not know how to use docker.
I instead wrote a how-to start, arguing that docker explanations did have no place in our software's manual. So, I wrote a how to.
They now expected me to explain step by step from where I got those commands. Ugh... The docker manual? I linked it. Still not good enough.
There is a sweet spot between a documentation. I do not need to have explained what a spin lock is, not even in a lock library. That's what other books are for. And even less on a library that just suggest that something could be combined with a spin lock.
But, I have often found myself lost, not knowing what the author wanted from me.
So, yea, being absolutely thorough is bullshit. Yet... How thorough? No one came up with a reproducible definition, yet. Just subjective opinions. Make a metric, first.,@cafecortado
Ah, a simple change. Check if it is b2plane or yellow and set it to shitStained. I agree. Good idea.,It doesn't have to be perfect. Just cutting out all the style debates. Prettier said so, don't like it, go open a ticket for a prettier change. Let's come back to debating the logic here.
It's a peaceful life. But of course, we supporters hate it, too. We just hate the debates more.,@BordedDev
I don't mind representational democracy. That is really not what I am having an issue with.
Look, my Mum, for years, was comfortable to say: "Oh, I do not watch news anymore. I don't know." But she went voting. Whom did she vote for? Well, right before the election she asks a trusted person. I.e. my sister. And then she voted the same way.
Which way I couldn't say, because my sister has an opinion, watches news, but hides behind she doesn't want to debate politics and there is a reason for why votes are secret.
Well, in CS terms, we have an in-betweenes graph and some opinions spread from node to node. Mostly a tree, I assume. And that's good. Convincing a node with 4 children which are all leaves is 5 times more efficient than convincing a leaf. That's good.
But as long as we hide behind this notion that we do not have to speak about it, we support hiding it, and we make it more tree-formed rather than a general graph.,@MammaNeedHummus
Not my editor. Just the default for tampermonkey. I braved it for five minutes so I didn't have to brave the yellow anymore.,@BordedDev hardly imagine it could be worse than now,@BordedDev
Again, that was not the issue. The issue is that anyone with an opinion should be able to argue their opinion to a decider.
That's the real magic sauce. We achieved that by making us all deciders. We call it voters, but it is the same.
And if we argue well, they will be convinced. Those are the people to convince. They will continue to convince others. Your opinion will keep track.
I don't speak about misinformation. That is unavoidable when you have freedom of speech. Fake news and freedom of speech are inseparable.
We just started to accept deciders to say, they aren't interested in hearing us out. And that's how democracy dies. This leads to building of echo chambers and a narrowing of Overton window. Or worse, different Overton windows in every echo chamber.
And, I have described the current situation...,@BordedDev
You decide by voting.
You are a decider.
It is done already. That is not impossible, that is the status quo.,@BordedDev
But that is luckily not the issue.
Sure, reduce the amount of false deciders makes sense. But that is not the big issue. Everyone has enough deciders around them to be actually capable of speaking to them. That's the magic I am referring to and that's actually what we're destroying.,I always found that weird.
Information is free. I can sign up to a university and study chemistry. And they will tell me how to build a bomb. Or how the great Vogel put it: "Lots of my studies was about how to prevent building a bomb by accident." (The Martian)
Also, Good Will Hunting was right. Profs just follow a book. At least a bachelor's degree in any subject is lying around in a public library for 5 bucks per year.
And the LLM won't tell me.
What protects us from the big bad attackers is their laziness. Or their density. They are too dense to work through a dense book.
Which means, if you have the grit to work through it, you will succeed in life. You won't find a lot of reason to actually use your knowledge to build bombs.
The system doesn't seem to be too fucked so far. Education means success great enough to not become a terrorist.,Hmm... Do you want all 512 different zeros refer to the same slot? Assuming a 32 bit float with sign bit and 8 bit mantissa.,@kiki
Easier in C.
double x = 4.32134;
return array[(long) x];
I mean, it is not contiguous, but it does allow you to use double values to address different values. 2^(how many fucking bits a double on your machine has). Assuming here, bits in double = bits in long.,@donkulator
I wouldn't see why. I don't need to dereference it when it is already on the stack. I just need to cast it.
On the other hand, I am no C developer and I didn't try it. All I am saying, cast the double to a long. Interpret this region in memory as a long.
You might be right, we can use your code for our double accepting array code.,And your mum even thinks you're handsome.,@Lensflare
Damn you, lensflare, damn you.,Taking someone's word for it? That's how you know your computer is secure. Or your router. Or your car.
And the funny thing, as long as everyone believes them, they are safe.,@jestdotty
I could and I would if my success rate becomes bad enough.
People debate a lot for small issues. "Do you really need a travel allowance? Does it have to be that high?" "Yes, I answer. It is to discourage you from having me come in. Plus, when you do, I do not care about how expensive parking is. I am covered."
That usually gives me some debate. But whenever I can simply say "industry standard," the debate is over. Industry standard is free quotes. Not yet worth it to change it.
But, I keep your advice in mind if my success rate starts dropping.,Cookie cutter opinion.
1. Whatever your flavor of clean code, you can understand it because you are used to it.
2. Of course we are writing for humans. That's why we writing classes and structs. You know, those do not exist in bytes? We could just write bytes directly.
3. Some goals are opposing. There is a reason why neither code golfing nor runtime challenges look like they write in programming guides. And it is pure luxury that we can write half-way clean.
4. Someone needs to write the stuff behind interfaces. A b-tree is never as clean or straight forward as saving something in an array. Sure, you can abstract it away and give both an identical interface, but someone has to actually write that b-tree and it is just never as clean.,Well, Turing-complete is a terrible low standard. After all, can I build a Turing machine in?
I mean, sure. More powerful than a push down automaton? Can recognize a language in which #a = #b = #c in any possible order?
Now, that's not such a high bar for anything that should be usable for normal humans.,@kiki
Are you familiar with the prisoner's dilemma? It stipulates, that even if you only think about yourself, writing readable code might lead to your best outcome.
I personally am a huge fan of tits, which is exactly why I follow a tit for tat strategy.,@kiki
It does apply. It is called a reputation system. Which is why you need to work on your reputation in every human endeavor.,@kiki
Strategies are a vector, not conditionals.
The urge to have sex is not disappearing (for most people) just because they wear a condom. It's a force vector, we are pushed towards having sex. Because in the big picture, it works to nudge us into procreating.
Same is true for this system. Tit for tat works. Reputation is its method. Reputation makes it a repeated game. Game theory requires infinite games.
There are also anti-cheating mechanism to weed out betrayers. But from time to time, those will find a niche in which they can sit and enact their parasitism.
It happens, that it doesn't matter like you said. But in the big picture, I'd rather not rely on finding a tiny niche.,@Demolishun,Sometimes you do not have someone good to review. Still review.
As I told the juniors. Are you uncomfortable with telling a senior that he did something wrong, ask questions instead. "Why did you do this?", "Why is this static?", and so on.
That's what I did in reviews as a junior. Sometimes I just wrote: "What is this code doing, I don't understand it."
And basically, a programmer out of his field is just a junior programmer. So, ask question. If you have a point, the other side hopefully accepts it, otherwise, they will write a short explanation or come over and show you why. And everyone is happy.,That's bullshit. Create smaller tickets. Then say, one pull request per ticket. That's the way.
If he creates huge tickets, pull requests will be huge.,Sometimes it is not the same thing.
I once got health data from a few doctor places. A bunch of data. But I got it hashed. Basically, the idea was, we aren't telling you our patients' data, except if you already know them. Hash their data and see if you know them.
For everything I got different hashing instructions.
Like lowercase last name, trim the ends, md5, sha256.
Some of those seemed randomly decided. And then, suddenly, some where identical. And I was like: "Should I use the same function?"
Let's say address and first name suddenly had the same instructions. I was like, no way, I do two different methods. Sure, the methods were copy-pastes, because they did the same thing. But I cannot guarantee that I don't get an update in next week. And if someone else gets the update, they need to figure out that address and last name are independent.
IDE screamed at me for duplications.,@Tounai
I agree, cannot always be small. But we have just moved the responsibility to whomever makes the tickets. If that person cannot make a small ticket, you cannot make a small pull request. That's how simple it is.,@Tounai
Kind of expected you to say this. The complain is upstream.
Just tell whoever complained he should complain to the moron writing the big tickets and when that person asks who wrote it, turn around, put on a baseball cap, turn back and say: "That would be me.",Wow... Did they hire AI or you? Useless.,@ilechuks73
I guess if an LLM can do it, I can do it better.
But honestly, that doesn't sound like the hardest ever task. First step, figure out the use case diagram for this page. At least mentally.,@jestdotty
Customer didn't pay for tests... That sounds familiar.,Let me link my rant to explain to you why you're the reason democracy fails:
https://devrant.com/rants/12873301/...,@kiki,Still very often the same in more modern languages.
Just write
let x =
And leave the rest open. It is of course caught, but the LSP already spits out a guess. Mostly strings for some reason,Somewhere around 15 years ago, the question was thrown around loud enough, if the church of England really should still hold seats in the house of lords, for them to make a pole and ask how many are Anglican.
They got an impressive number, claiming they represent all of those people.
The Richard Dawkins foundation then called a big sample of those self-identified Anglicans to figure out if they believed in a God as the Anglicans do. The vast majority denied that and when pressed why they identify as Anglicans, they explained, they try to be good people.
Oldest trick in politics and religion. Let your followers decide how to interpret your position individually.,People will call themselves fullstack nowadays, but all they can do it javascript... ugh... I mean clowns.```
Reference in New Issue View Git Blame Copy Permalink