Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)L
Posts
3
Comments
223
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Well, actually you're kind of wrong, at least in some contexts.

    So I'm not sure, how that works in other countries, but here in Germany, a large bid for some public contact has to parrot the requirements. The process includes a bloke essentially ticking all of the boxes in their request, and if you say (just for example) "we will deploy that in our k8s cluster" but they require a cloud ready solution, the bloke will not tick the box. Yes, that's incredibly stupid.

    Apart from that, who reads the bid texts? Not technical people, but bean counters and MBAs. The technical people on the other side are only asked for comment, they have no say.

    I wish you would be right, but in a world full of people desperately trying to justify their existence, fluff is essential.

  • Most "professional" writing is just a bunch of phrases interspersed with a few chunks of information.

    I'm involved with bidding and grant proposal stuff for software and it's 90% empty words. I draw two diagrams and a page of text, sales deletes 60% of the text, misinterprets the rest and then puffs it up to 30 pages.

  • And when people started writing books instead of memorizing epic poems.

  • It's usually not a question of legality, but efficiency.

    It's easy and efficient to bust someone for seeding, but busting hundreds for the odd file you can prove they downloaded is expensive and takes forever.

  • And reusable!

  • I'm still not sure, what exactly the journals are actually doing.

    Like, in all seriousness, what service do they provide? Just hosting the platform for anonymized reviews and basically a blog for the actual articles? That should cost maybe a few millions each year, yet this sector makes billions in revenue.

  • Python caches bytecode, so the translation happens only once.

    Java loads everything immediately and keeps it in memory. All beans, all connections, etc. That takes up a ton of memory.

  • Of course, but I'm not productive in it.

    If I have to do everything myself, it will take more time to get it done. The trade-off is of course always control/speed vs convenience, but C is definitely too inconvenient for me.

  • Not that limited. Limited means an old thin client, not a microcontroller. I already set up a small web server on a pi pico with mpy, so it's quite impressive. But from what I understand, the interop with "MacroPython" is not that great.

    Did you use mpy for x86 devices? Are the limitations worth it?

  • But that would mean either using Graal/native image or going full Scala, right?

    I only used Scala for Gatling, where it's obviously very java-y.

  • There's nothing to really grow. It's mostly just small helpers. Aggregate sensor data, pull data from A and push it to B every hour, a small dashboard, etc.

    C is too involved for my case , I want to be productive after all.

    Rust is already rather low level, though there are some cool looking frameworks.

  • It's all just pointers with semantics attached.

  • It's easy to criticize something when you don't understand the needs and constraints that led to it.

    And that assumption is exactly what led us to the current situation.

    It doesn't matter, why the present is garbage, it's garbage and we should address that. Statements like this are the engineering equivalent of "it is what it is shrug emoji".

    Take a step back and look at the pile of overengineered yet underthought, inefficient, insecure and complicated crap that we call the modern web. And it's not only the browser, but also the backend stack.

    Think about how many indirections and half-baked abstraction layers are between your code and what actually gets executed.

  • My company tried to jump onto the bandwagon in 2018 or so, but it fizzled out very quickly. Fortunately.

  • It's the same crap like with blockchain.

    People have no idea how sophisticated modern IT systems already are, and if you glue fancy words on solved problems, people will cheer you for being super innovative.

  • Are there ways to say exactly this kind of happy? I'm pretty sure, happy and gay didn't mean exactly the same. Synonyms rarely are drop in replacement.

    But yes, there is a gap now. That might get filled with another word, or people get better at discerning ironic and unironic meaning. Or maybe people stop using it in this way - groovy or rad aren't exactly common today either.

  • That's how language works.

    Many words shifted meaning over time, some gained connotation, some lost it, some turned to something completely different.

    Just look at the word "gay", it shifted from "happy" to "haha homosexuals are outwardly happy, so we call them gay semi-ironically" to "homosexual". The homophobic connotation was added, then the original meaning got lost.

    You can complain, sure, but just read an old text from the 17th century and try to find a sentence that means exactly the same today as it did back then.

  • I worked for a company that handled a ton of personal data. Pretty much every person in Germany, including addresses, bank account details, etc.

    On my first day there (fresh from university) I was given literally full read access to the entire database. And as I later found out by accident: they did not track any data exfiltration at all. I copied several gigabytes of data without anyone noticing.

    Your data is only as secure as the least motivated data broker sees fit. And that's not very fit.

  • Our legacy system always puts the label in the water and our clients rely on the faint cardboard flavor.