zarathustreal

I’m surprised you read moralism from what I said despite it being such an ostensibly immoral concept. Moralism would advocate for the Good Thing (tm), saving people, in other words.

Im actually advocating more of a pragmatism take on the situation by saying that we’re all worse off having so many more people with uncontrollable impulses. And I really didn’t even touch on the implications of divorcing actions from consequences.

Granted, this is a false dichotomy on a large enough time scale, unless you define morality as some specific set of beliefs rather than the more abstract “doing the right thing”

I am of course criticizing the ignorant application of morality in general, but ironically truly utilitarian morality and pragmatism happen to coincide in this case

> …and that is bad because they aren’t raw-dogging it.

You’re correct, I just want to emphasize that “not raw-dogging it” is bad because it deprives the individual of the self-discipline training. You’d think it would be a blanket Good Thing (tm) to have more people “survive” in general, but in reality, in the long term, it’s actually worse to increase the number of people on the planet that have to rely on chemical assistance to control their impulses

If it isn’t embarrassing then it’s not self-deprecation, it’s just virtue signaling humility

If you’re still using social media after e.g. the 2016 Cambridge Analytica scandal, the Twitter Files, etc, you kinda deserve this. You’ve been warned multiple times.

Hmm.. I must be even further out of the loop than you, why would that be embarrassing?

It’s hard to give that answer because after a security breach has happened, you know you made the wrong choice. It’s a tradeoff, as you said, for practicality.

Sometimes you gamble and lose. The bank doesn’t care that “well there was a good chance I was going to be fine” when it comes time to pay your mortgage.

“But I’m the only one that knows the floor plan!” doesn’t quite cut it. Exit the premises and get some therapy.

To riff on the famous Upton Sinclair quote:

“It is difficult to get an engineer to see something, when his salary depends on his not seeing it.”

Minutes? There’s no way you’ve seen a minutes-long stall caused by TypeScript inference..I need to see some evidence on this one

Those are the stated rules, let’s be clear about that. The actual rules are that there are no rules.

Painting an election by popular vote as a “battle of ideas” is falling into the all-too-common trap of thinking that we are rational agents. I can’t even begin to expand on how incorrect that is.

Even a little bit of candid consideration would uncover the truth of this. Political ads aren’t logical arguments. They’re emotional appeals. Hell, “he should be in charge because he’s most popular” is itself an ad populum argument. It’s nonsense to begin with.

I’m baffled that anyone is even asking the question..

Anyone reading this, if you are of the “well the employee whole typed the command is to blame!” opinion, could you please reply to this comment? I need to know what you think the purpose of a hierarchy is in the workplace.

..needless to say, responsibility for your direct reports is yours. If they fuck up, you fucked up. You have the choice to hire and fire at will. You choose who has access to take chances. You own the wins and the losses. If you’re a good leader you redistribute the wins and dissolve the losses. It’s the entire job.

It’s 2024. There are no kings or dictators in the workplace.

I’ve got to disagree here, especially with memoization and streaming, deriving metric from structured logs is extremely flexible, relatively fast, and can be configured to be as cheap as you need it to be. With streaming you can literally run your workload on a raspberry pi. Granted, you need to write the code to do so yourself, most off-the-shelf services probably are expensive

This is easy to say as a consumer but on the other side of it you’ve got to realize, most people are not like your average HNer. In my experience, customers are unwilling to dedicate even 60 seconds to reading documentation, FAQs, bright blinking banners, etc. The majority of “customer support” is answering questions and solving problems that have extremely simple answers and very obvious and well-documented solutions. It’s not something you want to spend money on, it’s usually worth it to throw an LLM at them and let go the ones that refuse to read. Even on the employee side, no one wants to be on calls all day dealing with people that are intentionally ignorant, it’s rage-inducing.

Astonishing.. they never cease to amaze me

It’s not even a hack these days, investors look for this as a traction metric

While I do agree, it would be nice to see something more than just “I hate this” in a comment.

For example you could remind the author of the perils of imperative programming such as needing to mentally simulate application state at every line to understand the program vs functional programming where you have referential transparency

Not directly related to the theme of this comment but I need to point out that the speaker of a statement has no bearing on its correctness.

I find it annoying to have to solve a puzzle to make progress solving my intended puzzle (i.e. whatever I’m computing)

Yea this can be problematic if you don’t have sum types, it’s hard to enforce correct typing while also having correct default / uninitialized values.

“Properties” in the Property-based Testing sense refers to mathematical properties such as equality, associativity, commutivity, etc

The point they’re making is that there is no performance without tradeoffs and “fast” is meaningless unless you define what you’re measuring. Asking the question implies a misunderstanding of the intent of the implementation, OP was trying to subtly let them know.

Hiring someone that doesn’t know Java would be.. quite a feat actually!

Clojure though, well, engineers should always be ready to learn

As a Haskell and then TypeScript dev now having to work with Python for exactly this reason, I second this sentiment. I can’t understand why Python is the language the industry decided to use as the de-facto AI language

I’d say be very skeptical of this advice if you’re a beginner. You almost certainly aren’t qualified to identify quality so don’t intentionally leave any on the table

Because it’s less effort to implement?

Make money off the work of other people?

…brother where do you think the money to buy the land comes from?

Both actual cheating and attempted cheating are morally wrong.

Actually cheating has an additional negative consequence attached: potentially exposing your partner to disease and / or infection

It’s not a request, it’s a rhetorical question with the same intent as the comment it’s responding to: signaling outrage.

Both are self-serving and harmful to the actual cause. Despite being on the same side of the issue, neither actually affect any change. Even worse, they both probably feel like they’ve done something to help by posting a comment on a social media site and are now less likely to take any real action

Do you really need an answer or are you as guilty as they are?

This is exactly true but it’s hard to accept that some people that are willing to work simply aren’t skilled enough to make a living wage

Isn’t it strange how employers can make the decision to pay their workers less than we think they’re worth, employees can make the decision to take a job working for less than we think they’re worth, and yet the person feeling responsible for all these decisions is us?