missed one from before :
If anybody actually tries to make this a hard requirement (which isn’t going to happen), then you can bitch about it at that time.
You mean aside from the laws this change was specifically implemented for....the ones you mentioned....those ones ? Is there some other example of a hard requirement you need ?
I was already bitching about it, but now i have your permission it feels extra special.
The problem with automated tests is that they only test for the narrow slice of things you actually think to test for. They don’t cover the gamut of things you didn’t think to test for.
They also only test how you write them to test for, which means if you make a bad assumption somewhere along the way your tests can’t help you find it.
Indeed, which is why it's an ever evolving suite of tests, as and when you come across problems and things that were missed, you add automated tests for them.
It's not magic, you only get out what you put in, but it is automated, which means that if you do a reasonable job you have a lot less to worry about from that particular issue in the future and now you have a much quicker way of checking for it.
Peer reviews cover two very important things:
- Knowledge sharing and de-siloing
- Logic and assumption checking
A fresh set of eyes and a different perspective is just so important to writing robust, quality code.
Also agreed, and automated testing is a way to partially formalise that knowledge into something that can be checked quickly and deterministically (if you are doing it right).
As i said before it's not magic and it's not a replacement, it's more of an augmentation to relieve some of the cognitive burden.
As with any other approach, it also has it's downsides, there are ways to go about it that can be actively detrimental.
In my experience a well done (and maintained) automated suite is a boon to ongoing development.
So......not a comparable situation then, ok.
but hey, if you want to argue with yourself about a slippery slope no one mentioned, who am i to stop you?
It seems you are having a good time with it, congrats.
edit : salty downvotes aren't a replacement for a coherent argument, they are however, entertaining.
Permanently Deleted
ah, so questions about logic aren't good questions?
or just that one ?
edit: i replied before your edit.
Permanently Deleted
I’m....not sure how much better i can phrase that question ?
It was concise, contained all the information needed for an answer, it could even be a single yes or no.
If you have an example of how that could have been asked in a better way, I’d be interested in seeing it.
There was no reference to my thoughts on the overall theme, the question is only loosely related to that theme.
If it helps, i don't care at all about the overpopulation classification or anything to do with it.
Is it easier if i remove all references to the theme? Let's try this :
Doesn't directly proportional mean both metrics being compared need to track each other?
Permanently Deleted
I'm not the same person btw.
Genuine question, wouldn't a directly proportional link require that sustainability efforts go up in a direct mirror to population?
edit: a downvote isn't particularly helpful here, is that a downvote of "yes, but i don't want to admit it" or "no, because reasons" ?
Permanently Deleted
If you’re going to cherry pick at least cherry pick from the text being mentioned.
Your whole comment was :
If we cut beef consumption by half, literally oligarchs would not have an economic reason to deforest the Amazon, because of the price drops. But no one wants to do that.
and wasn’t the comment to which i was responding.
Beef is the major factor in the amazon, by a large margin, as in my original comment. Palm Oil is not a significant part in Brazil, nor real state. Mineral is mainly in Roraima, but not as big as beef, because it’s based on small operations, there are a lot of sources on this for gold mining and the local Yanomami indigenous population that fights agains this (as this is done on their land).
Cool story, still irrelevant to my point which was:
Oligarchs gonna oligarch
Create a revenue vacuum (like removing the biggest value stream in a region) and oligarchs gonna oligarch right in and expand another value stream to make up the difference.
I’m not advocating for this to happen, I’m saying that expecting beef reduction to remove oligarchs from the amazon is unrealistic.
Permanently Deleted
edit: dammit, real-time updates kicking my ass
Permanently Deleted
Wrong place, my bad
Permanently Deleted
This mix of "things that are possible/reasonable" and "things that are wildly speculative" is interesting.
Producing beef is the most inefficient way to produce food, in both use of space and water, and energy.
Reasonable/possible
We don’t need to impose things on people if humanity reduces its beef consumption.
Wild speculation / nonsensical.
This is not at all how large societies have worked, in any time period, ever.
While it might be technically true, it's missing a whole bunch of steps in the middle for it to be a practicality.
If we cut beef consumption by half, literally oligarchs would not have an economic reason to deforest the Amazon, because of the price drops. But no one wants to do that.
And that was just off of the top of my head.
Oligarchs gonna oligarch, removing one revenue source isn't going to suddenly kill interest in the amazon, with it's abundant resources and space.
hmm, i have mixed feelings about this.
If PRs arent being reviewed for hours or days thats a management problem.
This i agree with totally.
Whether or not it's human resource based or policy based, it's usually a failing of process and that's generally a fault with management. in my experience anyway.
No amount of unit tests are a replacement for another set of eyes.
This though, while i wouldn't compare PR's to Unit testing in the first place there is some overlap in quality control.
If you have robust enough testing suites it can reduce the PR burden in a variety of ways, though most of them come down to automating away the need to catch so many logic and regression bugs.
That's not to say reviews aren't needed, they definitely are, it's just automated testing does have an overlap.
Notice that i said testing suites though, that's not just unit testing, that’s the whole CI testing caboodle.
Oh damn i didn’t realise there was something comparable already in there.
Do you have the associated laws that precipitated those changes, i can't seem to find any reference to them ?
As with a lot of things, it's contextual and subjective.
In my , personal experience, it depends partly on what of therapy methods will work for the current you and partly on chemistry/connection.
Like aromantic dating, you might hit it off immediately, you might go through x number of potentials before you find one that works.
I currently seem to respond best to conversation partner dynamics, like brain rubber ducking with add-ons.
Previously i've not responded well to that at all, and purely analytical detached professionalism was the way in.
so TL;DR;
For me it's:
In that order.
Each one is required to get to the following stage.
As for how it actually feels, i got nothing, that's partly why the therapy in the first place.
i agree with all of that.
Genuine question though, is it propaganda?
I mean it's essentially:
"Police install draconian system to to target the crimes of the peasants, while continuing to ignore the rich, system working as intended"
Edit: wait no, actually i just saw the 'Address fears' section, they are clearly pretending this is the only problem.
A specific subset of crimes reduced, i wonder what the demographic of those criminals is.
Not to say you shouldn't be arresting criminals, but they should be arresting all criminals, they don't need a 1984 style facial rec system for a 10.5% drop in crime.
Well, i say that , but equal opportunity crime prosecution isn't really what the police are for, so...
Actually arrest and prosecute the many many known criminals in the government and corporate world, no capital outlay in camera networks required.
Pretty sure that would give you a solid reduction in crime numbers as well.
TL;DR;
Why developers are abandoning Postman and its clones?
Enshittification
Permanently Deleted
Oh shit, you mean it's just like depression ? You can just decide to not be bothered by it ?
Why is nobody talking about this? it sounds like a revolution for mental health, this could wipe out the need for therapy entirely.
edit: OK so that was possibly a bit unfair, i recognise that aspects of mindset and choice are part of it, but your answer was so much like telling clinically depressed people "Have you tried just not being sad?" that it rubbed me the wrong way.
At the same company that immediately backtracked on a an image of a guy wearing a green hat in an installer? Probably.
Real happenings, Zero Bullshit
There was also the santa hat debacle
NOTE: I have zero fucks to give about ether of those specific issues, I’m just pointing out Microsoft's spine for these things has the consistency of overcooked linguini
TL;DR;
IMO, communicative tailoring is better than full masking, it required a lot of practice (for me) but was entirely worth it.
Disclaimer, all of this is incredibly subjective and YMMV.
My thoughts used to be "They have absolutely no clue how much filtering is happening" followed by a serious consideration on whether or not i'm putting in as much effort as i care to, to communicate with this person.
I'll up the translation if i feel the juice is worth the squeeze, but nowadays it's rarely an issue.
I'd like to be clear that i consider "masking" and "translation" to be distinct practices.
In this context, masking is an effort to tailor your communication to others with no real regard (or understanding) of the cost to benefit ratio or the long term impact of such a practice on your mental health, it's a full time acting gig to pretend to be something other than your full self.
What i call translation(or tailoring) is more like taking your existing personality and tailoring it to emphasise aspects that you feel would work better for communication with said person. There's little loss of personality fidelity and it feels a lot less like acting.
I understand it can sound the same, but it's an important distinction for me personally , because the latter is significantly less effort and still maintains my personality , which allows me to filter out who i do and don't want to communicate with.
For me it did take a significantly longer time to build up the social skill to be able to understand enough about people to tailor to them (for me, straight masking requires less upfront skill), but the result was worth it to me.
As a bonus, that additional required social skill makes all other related tasks easier as well.
Not to say that full masking isn't a useful tool sometimes, but it's like any other tools, in that it should be used in appropriate situations with an eye to the potential outcomes of doing so and will require practice and judgement to get the outcomes you want.
You could full mask through mandatory bullshit business meetings that serve no purpose other than to make someone underqualified for their job feel like they are important, for instance.
The real secret bonus to this tailoring is that I've found a broader range of people who fit the criteria of "my people" and also a generally expanded social experience, even with people i don't actually like very much.
Wasnt it so that it was easier for the woman to do up the man's buttons for them?
Because, real men don't button their own clothes.