chikere232

"we improved performance with a simple trick! (rollback our changes)"

The title kinda glossed over the fact that they started out with working, fast code, and then broke it. Sure, their fix was faster than their most broken version, but it's less impressive than starting with slow code and improving it.

> Find more moments to move throughout your day. While your food’s heating up, do some squats or take a lap around your work building instead of scrolling through social media. When you’re running errands, park as far away from stores as possible. Getting coffee with a friend? Catch up during a walk in the park instead of sitting in the coffee shop.

The last one about taking a walk with a friend sounds nice, but the other ones sound like the worst ways to get activity ever

Constantly forcing yourself to do things is hard and probably will fail. If you find things you enjoy doing, getting activity can be a treat rather than a chore, regardless if it's taking a dog for a walk, going to every museum in town, or finding a sport you like

That includes walking to the coffee-machine, to the elevator, to the car, etc.

If you walk a moderate 100 steps/minute, 49 minutes of walking is just 4900 steps which is easy to hit without even really intentionally walking anywhere, unless you work from home without going outside

It won't be efficient as it's python, but it could be readable

Then caring about a microptimisation over readability would still be the wrong call

Also, as the article points out, there are better and worse ways to point out a mistake

If someone completely flips out over a relatively minor mistake, going on the defensive or disengaging isn't necessarily a bad response

The article seems to talk more about how to avoid other people going on the defensive, than how to avoid being defensive yourself. Both things are probably useful as neither party in such an exchange can solve it completely on their own.

Being non-defensive towards someone actively emotionally abusive is a bad idea for obvious reason. Conversely if someone if sufficiently insecure or fond of the victim role, no amount of softness in the approach will help

People have forgotten how horribly it failed last time

That's very kind, but people doing the wrong thing with passion and energy is functionally worse than them not doing anything

Finally!

Didn't we make this mistake and learn from it in 2005? I guess not.

Ruby, and Rails, was an awful idea then and it's an awful idea now. Even in-browser stuff is moving to typescript to get away from having to write unit tests for basic type errors.

But sure, let's dig up this failure and try it again

At some point, adding software support for these things is just enabling bad ideas. If there wasn't support for Australia/Lord_Howe they might be annoyed into picking a simpler time zone

It's not an absolute and there are occasional good design decisions made in the name of extensibility

But what is an unmodifiable system? If it's code in your control, it can be changed, right?

+1

I spent years copying essentially the same ant-file across projects, just changing dependencies and target names. It's not really rocket science and unless you're trying to be clever, most java projects can look pretty much the same from a build perspective

My problem with gradle is that they keep making breaking changes for low value things like naming of options, so I have to chase deprecation warnings, and can never rely on a distro supplied gradle version

Gradle devs, please get over yourself and stay backward compatible.

Because building for extensibility adds real complexity for a hypotetical need

If you want the code to do something different later, change, replace or extend it then... when you actually know what it needs to do

Doesn't look promising so far

Sanctioning russia for invading ukraine isn't exactly an arbitrary power trip. Complying with such sanctions is the morally right thing to do here

>> complies with legal requirements relating to sanctions against a country conducting a war of conquest in europe

> "xenophobia"

ok.

At this point I kinda have to assume posts like these are just concern trolling and aren't really worth taking seriously

If it's genuinely naive, this is a great time to wake up to the fact that russia is conducting a war of conquest against a european country, and this is why they, and a bunch of companies associated with that, are being sanctioned. Why would any reasonable project try to circumvent such sanctions?

If someone makes you import a CA, you have to assume they intend to eavesdrop on ssl encrypted communications. Enterprise WPA doesn't require it.

The right flavour of incompetence might get you there without bad intentions but really if you give someone the capability of eavesdropping you have to behave as if they're intending to use it

Everyone, including the most competent, makes mistakes though.

If single small mistakes have disastrous consequences, the system is probably too brittle. Approaching it from a blameless angle gives you a better chance of fixing it, as people will cooperate to fix the issue rather than be busy not getting fired

You can still identify and fire/relocate/retrain incompetent people, but that is better done as a continuous thing than as a response to a mishap

This might be true if your only options are "find someone to blame" or "add more bureocratic process", but in a lot of cases you also have the option "fix the technology"

Even in aviation and surgery, improving the technology tends to be more effective than firing the pilot/surgeon or adding more paperwork. If you find there's a button that crashes the plane, fix the button. Don't fire the pilot or add another hour of education on how to not press that button.

It does provide a neat way to hide a supply line attack. C.f. http://wiki.c2.com/?TheKenThompsonHack

Lovely path to hide self-propagating malware then