i used to lose hours each day to typos, linting issues, bracket-instead-of-curly-bracket, 'was it the first parameter or the second parameter', looking up accumulator/anonymous function callback syntax AGAIN...
idk what ya'll are doing with AI, and i dont really care. i can finally - fiiinally - stay focused on the problem im trying to solve for more than 5 minutes.
With all due respect, but if you actually wasted hours (multiple) each (!) day on those issues, then yeah, I can fully believe that AI assisted coding 10 or even 100x'd you.
Yep, it may be an issue in notepad, which does not have helper like syntax highlighting, auto indent, and line numbers. But I started with IDLE which has all those things. So my next editor was notepad++ and codeblock.
I've been miserable over the last few weeks after coming to that same conclusion. Its so bad that i doubt the people that were pulling the strings can even tell whats going on anymore.
If the web is burned, something new will arise in its place (with new constraints) as long as there's a need. It's not like we only get one shot at this.
The constraints being different already make the replacement tangibly different
Maybe it will kill the veil of (perceived) anonimity which tangibly changes how people behave, or maybe the filter will be monetary and the filter will just affect the underclass shifting whatever discourse will be had
We can't act like whatever replaces the current web won't be different, because then there's no reason to change at all
> but large companies in particular seem allergic to granting you any visibility whatsoever. It's particularly annoying
If the blind spot is directly causing customer pain, find metrics that demonstrate the impact. If it ends up driving away your customers, then your company is securing itself to death.
> customer pain > driving away your customers > company death
You are implying efficient market theory, which is bunk.
Example: Our banks have endless painful papercuts yet most of us don't change banks just because of one pain.
We each respond to our own complex of costs and benefits (or risks versus rewards).
Second example: I use an iPhone because I judge it to be more secure yet I'm constantly fighting the same bugs and misfeatures that seem to never get fixed/improved.
Your chain of reasoning is broken? Or is it your model of the world?
> Our banks have endless painful papercuts yet most of us don't change banks just because of one pain.
Only because they're all painful. If there was a bank that was recognized as perfect, people would switch in short order. Switching to another bank that is also painful is not worth the effort.
> I use an iPhone because I judge it to be more secure yet I'm constantly fighting the same bugs and misfeatures that seem to never get fixed/improved.
Only because nobody else sells an iPhone. People would start switching over to other, less buggy iPhone on the market if there was such a thing.
> You are implying efficient market theory, which is bunk.
The efficient market theory says that, in an active market, prices rapidly reflect all publicly available information. How does that apply here, bunk or not?
> Example: Our banks have endless painful papercuts yet most of us don't change banks just because of one pain.
One bank pissed me off due to an extremely dishonest thing they did. So I overdrafted the account to the max ($500) and left them the bill.
(Not the first time I've done something like that to someone who deserved it. I've done much, much more in some cases. Endless painful papercuts? Nope, I do not accept that.)
They weren't happy about this. I think they hit "my" "credit" with that for years. I never noticed, as I don't borrow money; the machinations of these "credit reporting" agencies are beneath my concern. They have no credit in my eyes. I don't consort with crooks, I just punish them.
> Second example: I use an iPhone because I judge it to be more secure yet I'm constantly fighting the same bugs and misfeatures that seem to never get fixed/improved.
I haven't had a phone in decades at this point. Don't want one. I refused to be tracked, monitored, or abused by anyone. And no, I sure don't give a single fuck about any of the many people (and there have been MANY) who have tried their best to shame, cajole, insult, ridicule, harass, intimidate, or bully me into getting a phone. Fuck em all.
> Your chain of reasoning is broken? Or is it your model of the world?
Maybe it's you who's broken. Why do you accept slavery? Just to fit in?
Since you're hardly the only one with a similar way of thinking, maybe we could say it's the entire society that's broken.
I simply do not tolerate the things that you tolerate.
> I overdrafted the account to the max ($500) and left them the bill
I think theft is a poor answer - although most society accepts your rationalisation when dealing with government or big business.
Even worse is that you can't know what it may cost you in the future. My friend couldn't open a business account the other day. After many phone calls he was lucky enough to find someone that told him it was because he left that bank with an account $67 overdrawn when he was younger. That's in New Zealand: I strongly suspect he never would have found out the reason he was denied in many countries[1]. His only recourse was to use a more expensive provider (maybe $600 per year).
Please don't assume I am tolerant of abuse. I vindictively avoid some brands (and even all products from some countries).
I just often judge that my changing to a different service has costs I would rather avoid so I stick with a known evil (I'm good at finding workarounds for many niggles).
I also accept annoying papercuts because I believe all services have imperfection and flaws. Too many people count costs without balance.
What is this perfect bank you have discovered without papercuts?
Theft? HA! Nope, they attempted to rob me, on multiple levels. Categorically refused.
> Even worse is that you can't know what it may cost you in the future. My friend couldn't open a business account the other day. After many phone calls he was lucky enough to find someone that told him it was because he left a bank account $67 overdrawn when he was younger.
Oh no! How will I ever conduct business without the government or bank's permission? I guess the only alternative is slavery to some giant corporation, or death! What should I do?
As an American, I would probably like to consult with Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Smedley Butler, Lysander Spooner, Mark Twain, etc and get their thoughts on this matter.
While looking something up just now, this old saved quote from years back popped right into view. Couldn't have said it better myself:
"Why work at all? Just live off the system. The aristocrats do it lavishly. The welfare rats do it slovenly. Both know that working for an 'honest dollar' in this empire of lies is for suckers. This is why they set up artificial barriers of entry such as needing a 'college degree' for so many jobs so you have to wade through all that propaganda bullshit they spew these days. It's also why they have to make sure property prices stay high to keep the cheese dangling in front of the mouse. The system is designed to keep you churning the wheel while the others sit back, relax, and enjoy a life of leisure at your expense."
> That's in New Zealand
Ah! Found a serious problem. Not the problem, mind you, but a problem. There's a reason the self-described "elites" like to hole up in that place.
(It would be a shame if they never emerged from those holes. What would the world do without their 'leadership'?)
> I strongly suspect he never would have found out the reason in many countries.
Yes, I agree, there are many shithole countries in the world. I live in one, too. One learns to adapt.
> His only recourse was to use a more expensive provider (maybe $600 per year).
Yes, this corrupt country tried to screw me in a similar type of way, years back. I refused to play ball and just did what I wanted instead, very carefully and quietly. Now that problem is permanently resolved, for a fraction of what it would have otherwise cost.
> Please don't assume I am tolerant of abuse. I vindictively avoid some brands (and even all products from some countries).
One time, I went to the local Wal-Mart a couple days before Christmas. I parked at the back of the lot as the place was packed full. No problem, I don't mind walking. But then imagine my displeasure to observe that some complete asshole in a giant lifted pickup truck has double parked near the front of the lot.
That guy was way more important than anyone, in his own mind, clearly. Someone just had to educate him about how so very wrong he was. The job fell to me, as I was the closest warrior at hand.
So I sent a shopping cart sailing at warp 11 into his truck. ("Engage!") It just so happened to impact right on the corner of the cab, behind the door (the worst spot possible--thanks, God), and fucked it all up. Mission Accomplished. I returned home and celebrated.
I know of another funny incident where a similar type of person was similarly unimpressed by some douchebag in a Maserati (this is hillbilly country, home of Chevys and Fords) who likewise felt entitled to take up two parking spots on a busy main street where parking was limited. In this case the guy dumped a tractor bucket load of wet hay into his open convertible top.
The "victim" of that incident was raging on Facebook, offering a reward for whoever turned the guy in, etc, but everyone was just laughing at the SOB.
You'd be surprised what you can get away with, when everyone around you is quietly wishing somebody would do just that thing.
Sorry, you're thoroughly confused. It is not theft to steal from a thief. It's called "justice."
I realize this is a radical concept for your society, which at this moment is thoroughly unjust. Familiarize yourself with this concept now, as it will come up later on the test.
No wonder you keep getting robbed and fucked over all the time. You think it's somehow morally wrong to strike back! It's like you were born and bred to be a victim.
This also explains why so many others get victimized while you stand by and watch idly. Because you think there's nothing wrong with your fellow man getting fucked over!
I could explain more, but it would be useless, as your confusion is at this time far too thick and heavy to be dispelled by just one guy like me. What you're gonna need is somebody like me in your local area to help educate you.
My recommendation is to just double park your big ass honkin truck or Maserati somewhere, then just watch and see what happens. Eventually, you will reach enlightenment.
Dont give up on me! I too am eager to learn! Change the error of my ways please! I demand more of your thoughts regarding how to contend with daily life.
I admit, I went a bit through your post history, cause you're interesting, if unhinged.
First off, you make me think of an awakened and fully actualized version of Luke Smith.
So you're like, a hardcore American Libertarian? The no phone thing is incredibly based, and personally I think smashing a shopping cart into some asshole's truck is both hilarious and just. I do similar when I cone illegally parked cars.
So why libertarian and not anarchist? You seem to appreciate direct action. You seem to have opposition to all forms of oppression be they coming from the government or a bank or a corporation, you're willing to make what some would consider huge personal sacrifice to stand for your values. Is it an inherent distaste of leftist thought? If you are libertarian, that word was born in the most far left circles possible. It still is a synonym for "anarchist" in most places in the world.
I'm not trying to get your goat here. I like talking to people with completely different ideologies than me. Keeps me on my toes, prevents fossilization.
The product may take 20 minute to boot - a testament to its complexity and greatness (/s). But pointing that out might end badly when it’s the SVP’s pet. They will not entertain alternatives or efforts that distract from their mental plan.
And if a developer finds themselves getting feedback or communication from customers, things are probably on fire - absolutely literally.
reminds me of a funny anecdote from my first job in the tech industry. all of the team's VM's had VIM installed, but no emacs. when I asked a teammate if we could add emacs to the bsse image, he responded "It already has an OS, we don't need another one."
so they kept you aroumd then, eh? sounds like someone in HR with half a brain actually looked at the cost per ticket. those type of escalation tickets are ~3x more costly to resolve than non escalations. sounds like the total $$ per day of your tickets was higher than all your teammates.
I've always found it interesting that these tech infra companies' stock tends to rise in the immediate aftermath of these outages. My best guess is that people see the effect of the outage and say "Hey, this company I've never heard of sure seems to have a lot of customers!"
To be fair I've benefited from that in the past; this is an observation of my own that doesn't represent the views of any of my current or former employers.
The problem is this analysis and the mindset of a shareholder are about as far apart as you can get. The market likes to pretend it is "sophisticated and knowledgeable." It's a slot machine and as long as the handle pullers smell money in the machine they're going to sit there and pull.
It's scary how much of this thread comes from people who can't imagine a use for keeping internal traffic internal. in ipv4, if my laptop tries to use a printer with a public ipv4 address, that raises alarms. in ipv6, if my laptop tries to use a printer with an ipv6 address...
its not about the firewall. there's just a lot of extra attack vectors without a nat.
I agree with the majority of your point, but hopefully your printer hasn't been assigned IPv6 IPs that are global in nature and is instead limited to site-local.
For anyone who is reading this but hasn't use IPv6, IPv6 addresses are a large flat 128-bit contiguous address space, but they are not universally routable. The prefix of any specific address determines what group of other IPs can get to it.
We often think of a computer as having an IP address, but with IPv6, computers will have several addresses, all with different prefixes to handle different types of traffic.
If you plug your printer into your home network, and if the local DHCP server is configured to hand out globally routable addresses from your ISP provided /64, then your printer will also be globally routable (as well as your "smart" fridge, "smart" TV, "smart" thermostat, etc). In my personal experience this is the default situation with consumer ISP IPv6 setups.
This difference in theory versus practice is precisely why we see people objecting that IPv4 is more secure as far as default configurations go when it comes to home use.
That said, I expect (hope?) that all ISP gear should default to enabling a stateful firewall. Hopefully there's no difference between the default security of an IPv4 and an IPv6 setup in practice. But given the history I'm not entirely optimistic.
Note that DHCPv6 is really uncommon for IPv6, especially on consumer routers - so uncommon that Android doesn't even support it. But your point stands, even more so, with SLAAC.
>This difference in theory versus practice is precisely why we see people objecting that IPv4 is more secure as far as default configurations go when it comes to home use.
I mean, I agree with them. I think people who say 'NAT is not security' are only correct in the absolute most pendantic way and that the way NAT is commonly configured is literally the only reason the internet doesn't consist mostly of botnets.
But I also suspect that if IPv6 were more common, we as a society would be better at it, and not do dumb things like hand out globally routable IPs via DHCP6
The whole premise of IPv6 is that every device should have a globally routable IP. This thread went into DHCP for some reason, but that is uncommon and not recommended for IPv6, where you're supposed to use SLAAC. With SLAAC, I'm not even sure you could realistically disable the ability to get a public IP. And if you did, I'm not sure you could allow a device to access the Internet over IPv6 with a consumer router without it having a publicly routable IPv6.
>The whole premise of IPv6 is that every device should have a globally routable IP
I would agree with the small adjustment of, 'every device should be able to have a globally routable IP'.
There are a lot of devices, like the ones we're talking about, that should not be accessible to the internet at large. You're not preventing them from getting a public IP because you don't have enough, you're preventing them from having a public IP as part of the belt-and-suspenders approach because there's no need to have one.
> in ipv4, if my laptop tries to use a printer with a public ipv4 address, that raises alarms.
The only way that’s possible is that you have a firewall rule blocking outbound connections to common printer ports like 631. NAT couldn’t care less what outbound port you’re connecting to, so it has to be a firewall doing that work.
> in ipv6, if my laptop tries to use a printer with an ipv6 address...
…so enable that same rule you manually configured on IPv4 on the IPv6 firewall, too.
What you’re describing is not default or inherent behavior. If you went out of your way to enable it, you have the skills to do it twice. That’s assuming your firewall is more complicated that “block outbound port <631> to <any IP>”, which covers both protocols on most firewalls I’ve used.
> These are bad bug reports - because they have no stack traces and no context
heh, clever mind hack. kinda reminds me of Tony Horton's "Don't say 'I'm bad at x', say 'I presently struggle with x'".
Love the Spoelsky 'old code is battle tested/refactor instead of rewrite' - but there is one scenario it doesnt catch, though. traumautic events and abusive relationships can warp that old code quite a bit, making it difficult to trust that what youre debugging is actually your code, or whether its a virus. Sometimes you do have to rewrite.
idk what ya'll are doing with AI, and i dont really care. i can finally - fiiinally - stay focused on the problem im trying to solve for more than 5 minutes.
reply