My shield turns my receiver on, sets it to the right input (then the wrong input, then back to the right input), then... disables the decoder so there is no sound. Then sometimes enables the decoder about 20 seconds later.
I can't figure out an answer to why they'd do this. They're still supporting their custom Chromecast "receiver" app (for now?), which is a standard HTML app. But now they're detecting the Chromecast-capable device model, looking it up in an allowlist, then conditionally showing the device in the Netflix App's Cast UI.
This would mean if you have a new device and an old device in the same network the Netflix app might show only your old device! What?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what they've done here?
Chromecast is "gone" because it bridged the gap of dumb tvs needing streaming capabilities. Now almost every tv sold has some kind of smart feature or can stream natively so Chromecast aren't needed.
chromecast is alive, podcast, music were migrated to youtube app, url shortener is not core business and just side hustle for google. Not familiar with g suite legacy.
I work on the platform everyone builds on top of. A change here can subtlety break any feature, no matter how distant.
AI just can't cope with this yet. So my team has been told that we are too slow.
Meanwhile, earlier this week we halted a roll out because if a bug introduced by AI, as it worked around a privacy feature by just allow listing the behavior it wanted, instead of changing the code to address to policy. It wasn't caught in review because the file that was changed didn't require my teams review (because we ship more slowly, they removed us as code owners for many files recently).
> It wasn't caught in review because the file that was changed didn't require my teams review (because we ship more slowly, they removed us as code owners for many files recently).
I've lost your fight, but won mine before, you can sell this as risk reduction to your boss. I've never seen eng win this argument on quality grounds. Quality is rarely something that can be understood by company leadership. But having a risk reduction team that moves a bit slower and protects the company from extreme exposures like this, is much harder to cut from the process. "Imagine the law suits missing something like this would cause." and "we don't move slower, we do more than the other teams, the code is more visible, but the elimination of mistakes that will be very expensive legally and reputationally is what we're the best at"
Fuck it - let them reap the consequences. Ideally wait until there's something particularly destructive, then do the post-mortem as publicly as possible - call out the structures and practises that enabled that commit to get into production.
I've mostly stopped using Claude because of it, it will still try use Python for the most random tasks. It recently wrote an HTML file with some inline js in it, then started a local python server to open the HTML file, and check the log output.
This is in a node.js project. It is just too obsessed with using Python, and it seems to help it focus and make more sensible choices by removing the option.
It is not a single emoji, it's an instruction to interleave conversation with some nonsense. It can only do harm. It won't help produce a better result and is questionable at preventing a bad one.
reply