UmbertoNoEco

Just a (rather petty) example, React documentation is often lauded as very good,and I kinda agree.

But if you visit from a "low" resolution laptop(1366x768) and click in advanced options to the right on this link:

https://reactjs.org/docs/getting-started.html

It turns out you cannot scroll the options easily by using keys or a 2-button mouse because it does not have a scroll bar (why?). You have to use the scroll-wheel(not everybody has it) or drag down the menu in a clunky way, and this is the documentation of a front-end framework.

Another pet-peeve of mine it is what I call the "Netflix effect", the documentation is fine but there is not a clear, straightforward table of contents, and there are lot of internal links in the documentation so you jump from one place to the other but you are not really sure what order you are following or how much ahead or behind you are jumping from your current section. Microsoft .NET documentation is like that.

On the other hand, this is a very good example(except by the annoying Discuss thing)

https://javascript.info/

Everything is laid out in a very straightforward way, at any moment you have a very clear mental model of where you are in the document.

Postgres, Rails and Django are a little less clear in that sense but still extremely well organized.

Conform, consume, follow or ...simply die.

That's our era's motto.

There is always a justification or theoretical argument to avoid giving workers more rights.

https://www.science.org/content/article/fatherhood-decreases...

There are very nice people who can help you with difficult-to-find information. As in : "I remember this very obscure game in the 90s who came in some shareware magazine bla bla bla" 20 min later "That must be super-Ultroon the Mechanic Dinosaur, I played it a lot..."

One of the good things of the language being so all and pervasive is that there is a lot of very good learning materials.

> Learn to embrace the pain.

Judging by how much I suffered just to try to implement a sqrt function generically I think that is not an exclusive C++ thing.

> And yet converting code to Rust is hard.

Exactly, that is why many many projects will remain in C++ for a long long time.

https://twitter.com/raeinforma/status/1134042127565033473?la...

"Para i=1 hasta 7 hacer"

no hace ningún sentido. En todo caso sería " Para i en (1..7)" o "Desde i=1 hasta 7" o "Para i=1 mientras i < 7; i++"

In any case, all these copy-paste-just-literally-translate-the-keywords languages offer nothing new.

Either I misunderstood or there are some typos but this math seems all kind of wrong.

A 4% risk per year (assuming failure risk is independent of disk age) is less than 0.1% by week. A 2% risk per week would be a 65% risk per year!!

2 simultaneous failures at the same week for just 2 disks (again with the huge assumption of age-independent risk) would in the order of magnitude of less than 1:10^6 , so more than 20k years(31.2 k years tbc)

Of course you either change your drives every few years so the age-independent AFR still holds or you have to model the probability of failure using some exponential distribution like Poisson's. Exercise for the reader to estimate the numbers in that case.

University education has lost a lot of its appeal, that's correct, some sort of tragedy of the commons. But that part of "Self-taught people with impressive portfolios " is hilarious, navel gazing to the max. Nobody would deal with a self-taught cardiologist or structural engineer.