I think the thought is, it’s not a bad thing if you get annoyed after scrolling through 100 of something and having to click next. It’s like that lady that comes up on TikTok and says why the fuck are you still scrolling? Touch grass, maybe.

I basically agree with you. You can’t really ban dark patterns even though we all agree they suck. Legislature is the worst group of people to design UX.

Practically speaking, that means that people and organisations running a Matrix server with open registration must verify the ages of users in countries which require it.

So if I just host my account on a home server on my raspberry pi, then I don’t have to age verify? I see. And I can still invite friends and family, I just can’t open up registration to the general public? I see.

They are all over the place with their communication. I checked specifically when they first announced this partnership. And it turned out that when you share your videos with public safety, it was also being shared to Flock. And only the specific videos you choose to share. So I thought it was a big nothing before all this — just don’t share videos with public safety. I never have and never will.

But to walk their cooperation back must mean they got significant complaints and need to do some PR. Or they tried some shit that wasn’t spelled out in their privacy statement.

I think on balance, the internet was a bad idea. AI is just exemplifying why. Humans are simply not meant to be globally connected. Fucking town crazies are supposed to be isolated, mocked, and shunned, not create global delusions about contrails or Jewish space lasers or flat Earth theory. Or like… white supremacy.

I hate chrome and refuse to use it as a browser, but I won’t deny their dev tools are pretty good. I can get the job done in Safari and Firefox, but chrome set the standard that they are aspiring to (and maybe have caught, idk, I refuse to use it). I wouldn’t dock anyone interview points for using it — as long as their attitude toward other browsers isn’t “fuck people who use those, they are 6% of the market” (or whatever the right number is, I made that shit up).

You can also use the OpenAPI generator to turn a well-formed Swagger document into code. I’ve used it before. I didn’t hate it.

The generated controllers have a lot of boilerplate (I want to say 5 classes per controller), but it does guarantee the code is in sync with the documentation.

That being said, fuck manually maintaining swagger documents. It’s the worst of all possible works.

I tuned my usage up once I realized it is universal punctuation. I used to be unfamiliar with it and agonize over which punctuation was best for a given sentence. Can’t decide between a comma, semi-colon, comma clause, parenthetical, or what-not — just use an emdash and don’t fucking worry about it.

I’m pretty sure I haven’t been accused of being an LLM. Despite my lazy command of the emdash and comfortability with multisyllabic and archaic words, I think LLMs come across as insufferable bores and I don’t think I do that — not to that degree, anyway.

That’s not at all what is implied by the thought experiment. It’s not all men, it’s a random man. And it’s not that they are dangerous, it’s about what feels riskier from a woman’s perspective.

That’s why all the fretting over which kind of bear is missing the point. It’s not about arguing with women that they are wrong, it’s about listening to them and understanding that they have no idea whether the man is the sort that would kill them if they say or do or don’t do the right thing — but the odds are sufficient that all men must be treated like a potential threat.

The most common sources of grief are:
…
14. Roguelikes

That was spot-on.

Without wading into all the technicalities, could we perhaps agree that if you have to say, “what kind of bear tho’,” that we are already in troubling territory?

If you are a woman alone in the woods, would you rather come across an unknown man, or a bear? It’s a thought experiment. As a human woman, which represents a greater immanent threat?

AI PC / Copilot+ label

Okay that sounds solvable, at least. I mean, I hate it, but it seems that a person is getting what they pay for here. Thanks for the heads up. Hopefully there will be plenty of non-AI PC / Copilot+ computers and keyboards.

Did Microsoft demand vendors include such a button with those specs? If not, that sounds like a vendor issue, and I’d be looking at other vendors. Either way I’m happy to use keyboards/OSs without that “feature.”

I agree with your gist but…

JS is a really good language for building frontends.

Disagree. I think there is an entire ecosystem built out of coping with it being an awful language. That being said, the ecosystem is pretty good at adding first class features to a third rate language and your points stand. I don’t want anything to do with JS in the back end, though NodeJS isn’t entirely awful.

I’ve been a developer for thirty years. This is mostly nothing new. I’ve been ranting about the next quarter mentality since the early 00’s. Cool shit does get built, but it’s mostly hacky stuff that proves its value and then must be turned into the real product it pretended to be.

I’m much closer to the deliver management side of things (at least that’s what my timesheets say) and it’s still someone who has only thought about happy path stuff deciding and selling (Tia customer or to upper management) how long a project should take before there are even people to build it.

I’m ramping up a project now to replace an existing hacky React solution with a BFF/orchestration service with a Salesforce front end. It’s been scooped at 4 months since I was hired on 5 months ago. Wednesday we had a meeting to the effect that it was only scoped as a dumb proxy to rebuild the same janky solution in SF that we have in React. Except in none of the planning meetings did that ever come up. So I’ve been architecting an orchestration layer and the customer is only expecting to pay for dumb proxies. I wonder how this project is going to go…

That being said, I’m not hating the job. It’s always been this way. I’ve always had to fight with my managers to eek out decent products while working with my team on what can be compromised and removed from MPV in the how the customer will see the value and give it more phases of development to achieve the original vision. I even have a common refrain for my customers: “I want to make you happy. If my company can turn a profit from that, that’s between you and them.”

That’s not my observation. I could flip it around and accuse the author of defending massive if/else chains because my experience is that anything that needs more than a handful of lines of code is either a complex mapper or a nightmare of failed Boolean algebra.

That doesn’t mean the bad code I’ve seen is OP’s fault. It means there’s a lot of shit programmers and adopting a particular style doesn’t fix it.

I think this author has some points, but this is attacking the wrong thing.

Clean code is not the source of the problems described. If you see similar code and try to extract a common abstraction without further consideration, congrats, you’re thinking like a junior developer, and that’s not Clean Code’s fault, to pull one example.

Is this an opportunity to self-publish my own book for $100k per copy and be guaranteed one sale?

I guess we should buy more Blu-rays. But I don’t have a good space to library all of them… wait a sec… I have an idea…