Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
-
One time a former colleague reformatted all the code because he was very strict on code conventions.. so.
If (1==1)
{
Instead of
If (1==1) {
After some discussion on why he should never do this I denied him the rights to commit any longer..
Also..
One time a user requested a feature.. he wanted a drop down with some values without specifying where he wanted it. To our best knowledge we put it somewhere where we thought it would be usefull.. for instance when it is a car model drop down ypu expect it to be somewhere near a car screen right.. little did we know that he didnt have any rights to acces that screen at all hhahaha.. after that he came yelling in our room telling us to think for him.. in not so light words I told him that he should write his stories properly and that if he creates crappy stories he leaves me with a lot of freedom of interpretation of his stories so stop crying and get the fuck out of my room..
Its not that I get angry easily but I cant handle dumb people that do dumb stuff around me..14 -
I’m on video calls very often, but never really bothered if I’m wearing a shirt or tee. Even when the call is with people like CEOs or bosses.
This time though, the friend specifically asked to be in a good shirt, be professional and shit. Till this point all I knew was the friend started a very amazing business of sort and would like me to join too. And the person I’ll be meeting is very busy and impossible to get an appointment.
The buildup is so much for this call that I’m wondering it’s either going to be CIA or scam. Spoiler alert: it wasn’t CIA.
A few minutes into the call, I get a feeling it’s a scam. A few more minutes and I was sure it’s a pyramid scheme.
Now, I can’t call it out because the friend is really into it, almost blindly believes this scheme, and isn’t ready to hear any counter-arguments. So I thought, let’s just get over with this call.
The call went on for 3 hours. 3 WHOLE HOURS. I had to be attentive, professional, and not laugh on their face for 3 hours. On top of that, I was feeling hungry AF.
Mr. impossible-to-get-appointment was explaining Robert Kiyosaki’s financial theories - in a completely incorrect manner and interpretation. I tried correcting a couple of times, because I’ve read his books and theories in detail - but this person just went on and on and on for 3 fucking hours.6 -
Might be a loose interpretation of 'vacation', but I was running a marathon using my phone for tunes, when suddenly I got a call from my boss; our application server had died and he had no idea how to restart it. So while running the race I was timing my exhales to give him the step-by-step instructions for reset-to-restart. The good news is that the miles just flew by as he read the logs, and I responded with commands. Suddenly I was at mile 22 and was actually feeling pretty good; didn't finish the race with a PR but was happy with the result and did get the server back up.2
-
So I was talking with a coworker about a difficult situation I had with a manager years ago. It came down to how to interpret the company rules. The issue was about schedules and not being allowed to modify those schedules permanently. Say always leaving at 3pm on Friday every week kind of thing.
It came up because I wanted to work through my lunch to make up an hour. So my manager went pouring through the company rules and found this one phrase "you are not to modify your work schedule on a continuous basis". I was like what does that have to do with me working through lunch. He then told me that would make my work schedule during the day without a break to be a continuous day. Which to him was not allowed. I was flabbergasted at how insane the interpretation was on his part. It was not worth fighting it at the time.
Back to my current coworker. We keep talking for a while and he says to me: Was that manager an adversity hire?
I have been chuckling about this all day.1 -
Just realized:
We got to a point where I transpile typescript to react to es6 to plain es5. Just so that the browser could compile the code to bytes.
Sort of ridiculous. It's like translating a book from English to French to Spanish to Russian just so that we could create a Slavic interpretation of the book.3 -
Is this some properly fucked up interpretation of GDPR or what??!
We must capture your personal information, for no reason other than to prove we're not abusing your personal information??
2 -
Cannot believe I am paying for a course with a lecturer that doesn't even teach the students what a foreign key is, or the concept of a join table to breakdown many-to-many relationships in a database. Literally telling me "If thats how you interpreted it, it's ok to add that in, but you dont have to." In relation to adding a new entity into the ER Diagram as a join table.
It isn't up for interpretation, you are literally joining tables based on foreign keys that will create duplication and make no sense. I mean, you are teaching people who have likely never worked with DB's before... you cannot teach them this. 🤦♀️1 -
I know this is a fictional creative interpretation generated by an AI model, but it might just be the truest thing I've ever read 🤣🤣🤣
2 -
I usually work in a two person team on a hybrid application we are developing, using AngularJS and node.
This normally works okay, because he handles the back end (he's been on the project since January last year, I joined in August as a placement student), and I handle the front end.
However, due to Christmas holidays and such, he's ended up taking an entire month off, and won't be back until the end of January.
I've dabbled in back end before, some routes and that for SQL queries, but nothing serious.
Last Tuesday our core service for the application that needs to be updated in real time broke and pissed off the API provider because we were hammering them with requests.
My first day on back end and this happened. I didn't really know what to do, and had to call my teammate to ask what to do. I essentially just restarted things, and left them as is, until I could find a solution.
From there, I had to mock the operation of the service (which is a complex enough beast) to figure out the problem, and find a fix. Our app more or less hinges on this service, so if it messes up, it's the end times.
All of this while flying on what I've interpreted because the guy that's on holidays was the only guy that knows more about this project than I do.
To make things worse, the clients are being very particular because they're waiting on investments and don't have money to pay our company. So, if they're paying for 5 days work, they're going to put in 5 days of project development. The problem is that their interpretation of 5 days of project development has not changed from when there were two people on this project.
There are 40 tickets in this sprint (ends Friday) and 35 of them are assigned to me. Granted, not all of those take a day to do, but estimates don't mean anything, I guess.
Ganbarimasu.2 -
Had a legit argument with a manager about the text in a drop down menu. I argued that it should actually state what the option was for because I care about the user experience... Management wanted to conceal several business logic steps behind an unrelated option in the same menu because of a literal interpretation of the process and the client's request.
Interfaces should tell the user what is going on...2 -
So... the company I work started a selective process to hire some interns. Since we had a lot of applications and little time, they created a simple test with coding, theory and interpretation questions (9 questions in total) to filter the best candidates then focus on the better ones.
One of the questions (the only one the candidate would actually code) was asking to write a simple FizzBuzz function. The idea was to check the quality of the code and clever/creative ways to solve the problem.
Turns out ONE of the candidates were able to write the function. So now, this question is not being used to evaluate the quality of the code; instead, it's being used to check if the candidate knows how to code at all.
Such disappointment...
-----
PS.:
The idea to put this question on the test was heavily based on the arguments of this video: https://youtube.com/watch/...
:)2 -
I've just noticed something when reading the EU copyright reform. It actually all sounds pretty reasonable. Now, hear me out, I swear that this will make sense in the end.
Article 17p4 states the following:
If no authorisation [by rightholders] is granted, online content-sharing service providers shall be liable for unauthorised acts of communication to the public, including making available to the public, of copyright-protected works and other subject matter, unless the service providers demonstrate that they have:
(a) made best efforts to obtain an authorisation, and
(b) made, in accordance with high industry standards of professional diligence, best efforts to ensure the unavailability of specific works and other subject matter for which the rightholders have provided the service providers with the relevant and necessary information; and in any event
(c) acted expeditiously, upon receiving a sufficiently substantiated notice from the rightholders, to disable access to, or to remove from, their websites the
notified works or other subject matter, and made best efforts to prevent their future uploads in accordance with point (b).
Article 17p5 states the following:
In determining whether the service provider has complied with its obligations under paragraph 4, and in light of the principle of proportionality, the following elements, among others, shall be taken into account:
(a) the type, the audience and the size of the service and the type of works or other subject matter uploaded by the users of the service; and
(b) the availability of suitable and effective means and their cost for service providers.
That actually does leave a lot of room for interpretation, and not on the lawmakers' part.. rather, on the implementer's part. Say for example devRant, there's no way in hell that dfox and trogus are going to want to be tasked with upload filters. But they don't have to.
See, the law takes into account due diligence (i.e. they must give a damn), industry standards (so.. don't half-ass it), and cost considerations (so no need to spend a fortune on it). Additionally, asking for permission doesn't need to be much more than coming to an agreement with the rightsholder when they make a claim to their content. It's pretty common on YouTube mixes already, often in the description there's a disclaimer stating something like "I don't own this content. If you want part of it to be removed, get in touch at $email." Which actually seems to work really well.
So say for example, I've had this issue with someone here on devRant who copypasted a work of mine into the cancer pit called joke/meme. I mentioned it to dfox, didn't get removed. So what this law essentially states is that when I made a notice of "this here is my content, I'd like you to remove this", they're obligated to remove it. And due diligence to keep it unavailable.. maybe make a hash of it or whatever to compare against.
It also mentions that there needs to be a source to compare against, which invalidates e.g. GitHub's iBoot argument (there's no source to compare against!). If there's no source to compare against, there's no issue. That includes my work as freebooted by that devRant user. I can't prove my ownership due to me removing the original I posted on Facebook as part of a yearly cleanup.
But yeah.. content providers are responsible as they should be, it's been a huge issue on the likes of Facebook, and really needs to be fixed. Is this a doomsday scenario? After reading the law paper, honestly I don't think it is.
Have a read, I highly recommend it.
http://europarl.europa.eu/doceo/...13 -
This shit is fascinating, especially reading about the variations in function of the various brodmann areas:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
My favorite schizo-interpretation of this is "your head is full of bees."
i.e. brodmann area 10, which is thought to be responsible for memory recall strategies (basically an adaptive memory allocator and heap) has about 250 million neurons in a pinprick of a volume.
A bee has about 1 million neurons.
In otherwords: the part of your brain that decides how memory is managed has only the equivalent brainpower of 250 bees, lol.
Obviously a simplification-to-the-level-of-absurdity but it's fun to intentionally interpret something to the level of distortion.11 -
Rant against a new religion: the Agile Religion, started by the Agile Manifesto: https://agilemanifesto.org
This manifesto is as ambiguous and open to interpretation as any religious text. You might as well get advice from a psychic. If you succeed, you'll start believing in them more. If you don't, then they'll say you misinterpreted them. The whole manifesto just re-states the obvious with grandiloquent words.
For example: "Deliver working software frequently, from a couple of weeks to a couple of months, with a preference to the shorter timescale." What does this say REALLY? To me, it just says "deliver software, try to be fast." Great, thanks for re-writing my job description. Of course, some features take "a couple of weeks", while others "a couple of months". Again, thanks for re-stating the obvious.
"Value *working software* over _comprehensive documentation_"
Result => PHP
"Welcome changing requirements, even late in development."
I'm okay with this one as long as the managers also `welcome the devs changing deadlines, even the night before the release date`. We're not slaves; we're more like architects. If you change the plans for the building, we're gonna have to demolish part of what we've already built and re-construct. I'm not gonna spring just because you change your mind like a girl changes clothes.
"Business people and developers must work together daily throughout the project."
Daily? Fine. ONCE a day, sure. But this doesn't give you the right to breathe down my neck or break my concentration by calling me every couple of mintues.
"The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation."
- Not if you could've summed up that meeting in an email.
- Whereas that might be true for clarity, write that down.
"Working software is the primary measure of progress."
... is how you get a tech debt the size of the US's.
"The sponsors, developers, and users should be able to maintain a constant pace indefinitely."
Have you heard of vacations?
"Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design enhances agility."
So you're telling us "do good". Again, thank you for re-writing my job description.
It's just a bunch of fancy babble, more suitable in poetry than in the dev world. It doesn't provide any scientific evidence for any of its supposed suggestions, so I just won't use it2 -
Any other IT company is like:
* Task -> Designer -> Markup coder -> Backend -> Finish
Our IT company:
Act I: "Art of setting up contact with idiots".
------
Items:
*Cave scripts (aka "typical task")
Designer: -- "DAFUQ?"
Customer: *gives another interpretation*
Designer: -- "Erm... really? White text on white background?"
Customer: -- "Make a decision by yourself. I was expecting much more independence from you. You are an expert after all."
Designer: -- "Well. I'm making decision by myself. The text will be placed *here* and will be gray-colored, because *bla-bla-bla*"
Customer: -- "I disagree."
Designer: *1 hour of silence later* -- "Well...k."
Act II: "Design meets ar(u)tist"
----
Items:
*Something, that was drawn by dumb kid while smashing his own head against desk. (PSD layout)
* Salt (to pour it on open wounds)
Designer: -- "I'm seeing this task *this way*"
Markup: -- "And how do u think i should get this done? Have you even seen what you made?? This is bullshit!"
Designer: -- "It's not bullshit! It's a sci-fi themed layout!"
Markup: -- "With gameplay elements and graphics from Alien Shooter??"
Designer: -- "Well, I don't care." *brings new edits and changes*
Markup: -- "????"
Designer: *smug face* -- "!!!"
Act III (7 days later, 9 hours till deadline): "Short story about boy, who was trying to hang himself, but instead fell out from window."
----
Items:
*Markup, smelling like it went through hell and back (x1)
* Markup coder with fried butt (x1)
Backend: -- "What. Is. THAT?"
Markup: -- "It's a work we should complete in 9 hours."
Backend: -- "WE?? I know u mean me, but that's a nightmare. What the f*ck were you doing all this time?"
Markup: -- "Well..." *finds out that he was only watching films and sleeping* "I was making this thing up..."
Backend: -- "You mean "f*cking" *this* thing "up"?"
Markup: -- "Not without it"
(*3 hours of edits and changes of color from white to white later*)
Backend: -- "Well, let's do this."
*Picks PHP and tries to bundle it up with MongoDB. After some time tries to rewrite everything to JS and starts shouting something like "F***CK" and looking for window to walk through. Figures out that he is on first floor. And that he is too lazy to go upstairs*
Act IV (3 days after deadline): "Pain and misery":
-----
Items:
*Something covered with insul(t)ating tape. (Final product)
Customer: -- "Really?"
Team: -- "Kinda."
Customer: -- "Well, thanks for your work anyway. It feels like it's going to disassemble right in my hands but it just works. Oh, also, you didnt made this in time, so your payment will be over9000 times lower. That's all"
Backend, on fluids: -- "Well...yeah..."
Markup: -- "Don't look at me like that. I really was doing my job."
Designer, with twitching eye: -- "Huh, I see. You worked so hard that we have nothing to eat now. Thanks for that."
Backend: ...
1 -
!rant
For all of youse that ever wanted to try out Common Lisp and do not know where to start (but are interested in getting some knowledge of Common Lisp) I recommend two things:
As an introductory tutorial:
https://lisperati.com/casting.html/
And as your dev environment:
https://portacle.github.io/
Notice that the dev environment in question is Emacs, regardless of how you might feel about it as a text editor, i can recommend just going through the portacle help that gives you some basic starting points regarding editing. Learn about splitting buffers, evaluating the code you are typing in order for it to appear in the Common Lisp REPL (this one comes with an environment known as SLIME which is very popular in the Lisp world) as well as saving and editing your files.
Portacle is self contained inside of one single directory, so if you by any chance already have an Emacs environment then do not worry, Portacle will not touch any of that. I will admit that as far as I am concerned, Emacs will probably be the biggest hurdle for most people not used to it.
Can I use VS Code? Yes, yes you can, but I am not familiar with setting up a VSCode dev environment for Emacs, or any other environment hat comes close to the live environment that emacs provides for this?
Why the fuck should I try Common Lisp or any Lisp for that matter? You do not have to, I happen to like it a lot and have built applications at work with a different dialect of Lisp known as Clojure which runs in the JVM, do I recommend it? Yeah I do, I love functional programming, Clojure is pretty pure on that (not haskell level imo though, but I am not using Haskell for anything other than academic purposes) and with clojure you get the entire repertoire of Java libraries at your disposal. Moving to Clojure was cake coming from Common Lisp.
Why Common Lisp then if you used Clojure in prod? Mostly historical reasons, I want to just let people know that ANSI Common Lisp has a lot of good things going for it, I selected Clojure since I already knew what I needed from the JVM, and parallelism and concurrency are baked into Clojure, which was a priority. While I could have done the same thing in Common Lisp, I wanted to turn in a deliverable as quickly as possible rather than building the entire thing by myself which would have taken longer (had one week)
Am I getting something out of learning Common Lisp? Depends on you, I am not bringing about the whole "it opens your mind" deal with Lisp dialects as most other people do inside of the community, although I did experience new perspectives as to what programming and a programming language could do, and had fun doing it, maybe you will as well.
Does Lisp stands for Lots of Irritating Superfluous Parentheses or Los in stupid parentheses? Yes, also for Lost of Insidious Silly Parentheses and Lisp is Perfect, use paredit (comes with Portacle) also, Lisp stands for Lisp Is Perfect. None of that List Processing bs, any other definition will do.
Are there any other books? Yes, the famous online text Practical Common Lisp can be easily read online for free, I would recommend the Lisperati tutorial first to get a feel for it since PCL demands more tedious study. There is also Common Lisp a gentle introduction. If you want to go the Clojure route try Clojure for the brave and true.
What about Scheme and the Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs? Too academic for my taste, and if in Common Lisp you have to do a lot of things on your own, Scheme is a whole other beast. Simple and beautiful really, but I go for practical in terms of Lisp, thus I prefer Common Lisp.
how did you start with Lisp?
I was stupid and thought I should start with it after a failed attempt at learning C++, then Java, and then Javascript when I started programming years ago. I was overwhelmed, but I continued. Then I moved to other things. But always kept Common Lisp close to heart. I am also heavy into A.I, Lisp has a history there and it is used in a lot of new and sort of unknown projects dealing with Knowledge Reasoning and representation. It is also Alien tech that contains many things that just seem super interesting to me such as treating code as data and data as code (back-quoting, macros etc)
I need some inspiration man......show me something? Sure, look for a game called Kandria in youtube, the creator, Shimera (Nicolas Hafner) is an absolute genius in the world of Lisp and a true inspiration. He coded the game in Common Lisp, he is also the person behind portacle. If that were not enough, he might very well also be Shirakumo, another prominent member of the Common Lisp Community.
Ok, you got me, what is the first thing in common lisp that I should try after I install the portacle environment? go to the repl and evaluate this:
(+ 0.1 0.2)
Watch in awe at what you get.
In the truest and original sense of the phrase (MIT based) "happy hacking!"9 -
What's the strangest Assembler or Pseudo-Assembler you've ever encountered?
I wrote a Z-machine (Infocom's virtual text adventure interpreter) and it was quite an interesting interpretation of bytes:
- The first 3 bits of an instruction tell you the opcode category, the rest are the instruction
- The 2nd (and maybe 3rd) byte tell you in 2-Bit chunks the operand types.
- text is encoded in 5-Bit chunks, with special characters for CapsLock that double function as padding (if your text doesn't align with the 3 letters per 2 bytes).
- and of course there are 5 different versions that all work slightly differently (as in CapsLock becomes Shift or "this special character isn't in use anymore")3 -
There are 10 kind of people:
-those who will not get this at all
-those who expected 10 to be in base 10
-those who are used to the joke with 10 in base 2
-those who will think 10 is in base 6
-those who will add kinds of people and say that my interpretation of "10" was wrong (a subset of those will make the second group be rigth)
-those who will help me to find a way to recursively break this joke (pls, help, i can't find it... 😭😭)3 -
Well, I just had something negative to say about the whole flat earth theory followed by me expressly saying I'm not looking for an argument
Interpretation: I just stirred the hornet's nest... Let's see what happens now7 -
The hype of Artificial Intelligence and Neutral Net gets me sick by the day.
We all know that the potential power of AI’s give stock prices a bump and bolster investor confidence. But too many companies are reluctant to address its very real limits. It has evidently become a taboo to discuss AI’s shortcomings and the limitations of machine learning, neural nets, and deep learning. However, if we want to strategically deploy these technologies in enterprises, we really need to talk about its weaknesses.
AI lacks common sense. AI may be able to recognize that within a photo, there’s a man on a horse. But it probably won’t appreciate that the figures are actually a bronze sculpture of a man on a horse, not an actual man on an actual horse.
Let's consider the lesson offered by Margaret Mitchell, a research scientist at Google. Mitchell helps develop computers that can communicate about what they see and understand. As she feeds images and data to AIs, she asks them questions about what they “see.” In one case, Mitchell fed an AI lots of input about fun things and activities. When Mitchell showed the AI an image of a koala bear, it said, “Cute creature!” But when she showed the AI a picture of a house violently burning down, the AI exclaimed, “That’s awesome!”
The AI selected this response due to the orange and red colors it scanned in the photo; these fiery tones were frequently associated with positive responses in the AI’s input data set. It’s stories like these that demonstrate AI’s inevitable gaps, blind spots, and complete lack of common sense.
AI is data-hungry and brittle. Neural nets require far too much data to match human intellects. In most cases, they require thousands or millions of examples to learn from. Worse still, each time you need to recognize a new type of item, you have to start from scratch.
Algorithmic problem-solving is also severely hampered by the quality of data it’s fed. If an AI hasn’t been explicitly told how to answer a question, it can’t reason it out. It cannot respond to an unexpected change if it hasn’t been programmed to anticipate it.
Today’s business world is filled with disruptions and events—from physical to economic to political—and these disruptions require interpretation and flexibility. Algorithms alone cannot handle that.
"AI lacks intuition". Humans use intuition to navigate the physical world. When you pivot and swing to hit a tennis ball or step off a sidewalk to cross the street, you do so without a thought—things that would require a robot so much processing power that it’s almost inconceivable that we would engineer them.
Algorithms get trapped in local optima. When assigned a task, a computer program may find solutions that are close by in the search process—known as the local optimum—but fail to find the best of all possible solutions. Finding the best global solution would require understanding context and changing context, or thinking creatively about the problem and potential solutions. Humans can do that. They can connect seemingly disparate concepts and come up with out-of-the-box thinking that solves problems in novel ways. AI cannot.
"AI can’t explain itself". AI may come up with the right answers, but even researchers who train AI systems often do not understand how an algorithm reached a specific conclusion. This is very problematic when AI is used in the context of medical diagnoses, for example, or in any environment where decisions have non-trivial consequences. What the algorithm has “learned” remains a mystery to everyone. Even if the AI is right, people will not trust its analytical output.
Artificial Intelligence offers tremendous opportunities and capabilities but it can’t see the world as we humans do. All we need do is work on its weaknesses and have them sorted out rather than have it overly hyped with make-believes and ignore its limitations in plain sight.
Ref: https://thriveglobal.com/stories/...6 -
worked the whole weekend on a presentation my boss held today. he totally messed up and gave false interpretation to every single number. karma's a bitch😁
-
iOS development: When Google didn't realise that you trying to start a serious development question dealing with the keyword "swift" and anoying Taylor Swift searchRequestBombs it. Anytime.
Hey Google come on, I'm interested in serious answers and not that kind of celeb rubbish bullshit 😡
And what the hell about Kim Kardashian ist that your kind of interpretation of objective-c or?1 -
Person1: Can I follow you on social media? (And learn more about you and your life, your friends, your relatives, where you work, what you eat, where and when you go on vacation, where you live, your relationship status, and more! More information than I could get if I setup a surveillance van outside your home for months on end, basically.)
Person2: Sure!
Person1: Can I follow you home?
Person2: That is creepy...1 -
“A computer language is not just a way of getting a computer to perform operations but rather that it is a novel formal medium for expressing ideas about methodology. Thus, programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines [including the human] to execute.” (The Structure and Interpretation of a Computer Programs, 1985)
“If you try to make something beautiful, it is often ugly. If you try to make something useful, it is often beautiful.” -Mr. OSCAR WILDE -
In the kingdom of aws reigns the Owner of Products.
In his court many a vassal noble (or a "sre" as they are often called) delivers their tribute.
Wise ministers (called "analysts" in these here parts) advice the Owner of Products on how to instruct his sres and where to lead the kingdom.
Needless to say, in the court the blabber is endless and the egos of the courtiers, deservedly or not, are even larger.
But there is but one member of the court, leader of none but master of japes, who dares to mock not just the courtiers, but even the Owner of Products.
Tester the Jester, from the houses of Operations Research and Quality Assurance.
There is a unique relationship between a ruler and his jester. The jester mocks the ruler, with the most outlandish of propositions, with the most malicious interpretations of the ruler's orders, evidencing the most absurd (but mathematically viable) results of a plan.
The jester makes ridicule of the ruler's edicts... so that the Owner of Products may remain humble, without need to defer to any upstart courtier.
And, in a more subtile manner, the jester prevents any courtier from maliciously complying with the edicts of the ruler.
For all in the court have heard how the lowest among them voiced the preposterous interpretation... And dare not show themselves to be even lower.
TL;DR had an all-hands meeting of tech leaders with the allmighty PO. In the meeting there is this bloke who apparently spends all his time just fucking with the bigwigs' ideas. Dude is a department of one. It seems that his whole job is being an outlandish scenario simulator & sarcasm artist. I now have way more respect for this place. -
!rant (I got down voted for this on Stack Overflow, so I try to discuss the issue with a more professional crowd.)
In a Software Engineering class, we had an assignment to read Parnas' seminal paper on modularization [0]. In this paper, two approaches of dividing a software into modules are discussed:
Traditional Approach: A flow chart is drawn to work out the single processing steps and the program's high-level flow. Then every processing step is turned into a module. This approach doesn't yield very good results.
New Approach: Every design decision will be turned into a module by the means of information hiding. This approach leads to much better results.
My personal interpretation of the term design decision is that the modules are identified as data structures rather than as processing steps of an algorithm. This makes sense, because data structures are much more suitable for information hiding then processing steps of an algorithm. (The information inside a data structure is hidden behind functions, whereas a function only hides more detailed processing steps and no information; the information is actually passed in as arguments.)
Why does the second approach work so much better than the first approach? Here comes my second interpretation: The single processing steps of an algorithm are not replaceable (and thus not reusable), whereas it's possible to convert data structures into other data structures.
And here's my question: Could that be the reason why software development using workflow engines (based on BPMN, for example) never really took off?
My personal experience is that the activities created in such workflows are hardly ever reused, but there often are big data structures passed around all the involved activities, even if most of the activities use only one or two of them.
My question exaggerated: Could we get rid of all those clumsy workflow engines by giving managers Parnas' paper to read?
[0]: On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules (Parnas 1972)2 -
Team Lead (not my team, thankfully) sends outs a team-wide message (in their exact words):
"please DM me with the task link if you are adding any new tasks in Jira. This is to make sure that i am aware of any ad-hoc task coming up in the jira queue and also to make sure that all the task are following a common template."
Interpretation : "I'm just too lazy to look at each jira issue after the last one that I followed up on (which is my job BTW). So I'll add some extra work for you to explain everything to me on DM"
Way to go for killing productivity. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Thankfully, this is not my team. If they were my team lead, I'd be super furious. I'd even report it to upper management. I'd even offer to do their job and let them do mine. I think their job just got so easy if everyone was to go report to him like that.3 -
I hate group project so much.
I yet again successfully stirred up a big drama in my project group. For project, I proposed a CDN cache system for a post only database server. Super simple. I wanted to see what ideas other people come up with. So I said I am not good at the content and the idea is dumb. Oh man, what a horrible mistake. One group member wants to build a chat app with distributed storage. We implemented get/put for a terribly designed key value store and now they want to build a freaking chat app on top of a more stupid kV store using golang standard lib. I don't think any of those fools understand the challenges that comes with the distributed storage.
I sent a video explaining part of crdt. "That's way too complicated. Why are you making everything complicated."
Those fools leave too much details for course stuff's interpretation and says
"course stuff will only grade the project according to the proposal. It's in the project description".
I asked why don't they just take baby steps and just go with their underlying terribly designed kV store.
"Messaging app is more interesting and designing kV store with generic API is just as difficult"
😂 Fucking egos
Then I successfully pissed off all group members with relatively respectful words then pissed off myself and joined another group.1 -
Damn, I hate it if asking a question leads the counterpart to telling long background stories. Please: Just. Answer. The. Question.
I have my own thoughts and reasons why I ask and don't need your interpretation of my question. If I was not specific enough, please ask back.9 -
Ok. I GIVE UP! ...for at least a couple hours...
I'm not a big believer in... well anything suitable to the literal definition of believe. But there's only so much 'wtf? How is this even possible?' and any answer u can come up with is nearly statistically impossible...
I am a neuro-atypical (and just extremely atypical even if i somehkw was neurotypical) being, based on logic, finely calculated statistical probability and the most raw data and as unbiased as realistically possible, algorithms and interpretation (usually recursive pattern recognition with several highly detailed historical sources.
...but at some point statistical improbability and a collation of separate, yet relatively closely occuring events/circumstances makes logic, itself a primary suspect of corruption.
What was the breaking point that caused me to (temporarily) give up and tell logic to f off for a bit cuz maybe the illogical and mythical is the real logic, leaving me in a losing battle with 'the' fates?
Trying to get all my sourcing/purchase orders in/paid for/on the literal boats b4 end of the workday/week in china...
1st, had to drop a supplier cuz they have limited reps. When the one ive had 7+ years left, i got the aloof blonde girl societal trope of a rep... who for the 2nd time (despite the several very blunt complaints above her, incl me) she sent out a promotional update to the entire client list (ie, inherently competitors) as CC not BCC... over 200 business email accounts with tailored info of their sourcing.
2- totally diff company/ industry a former rep i was glad be rid of apparently just sfarted back for "awhile" as i needrf to restock/scale...apparently she forgot everything we discussed at length... lke if you want a chance on my business im not gonna be wasting time looking through your gui "mini store to then inquire about everything individually insead of a simple spreadsheet(which i print and put in a 3-ring binder rotating current catalogues in the same format i require everywhere)
3.dog was an ahole, my packed schedule got delayed and morphed.. a bunch of little bs thatd normally have no extra thought impact, hyperfocused forgetting one of my alarms til i realised my idiopathic fever was back and i didnt take/apply meds (pain/muscle relaxers mainly so despite this odd free time and needing to shower. I gotta sit on my rear, leg elevated/non-productive far 40min b4 i can shower (as functional legs and lack of syncope is almost a req to shower)
4. A new-ish rep of a company/factory i like/respect enough to not mention in relation... he makes invoice 1.. slight error thst was easily resolved...#2 was flawless... he goes to officially generate the contract(alibaba... verrrry simple with lots of extra explanation buttons). Price and all items match, its near workweek end so i was waiting for it so i could quickly pay/have it on the boat b4 it left and few fdav days are behind...
I put in card info, get to the 2 cbeck boxes (imo should be only 1 but whatever) asking if billing address is same ss delivery(its always default yes)... then i see a few lines in chinese (i can read enough for business negotiations... typical words/sentences innately look different than things like individual letters/address and postal indicators.) After a few loops of double checking, mentally trying to dismiss my i Intial judgement cuz it'd be too ridiculous... even resorted to google .... nope... initial wtf was spot on... recipient name/address was indeed the company(multi factory producer)i was purchasing a wholesale, via sea freight, bulk of products from.
Im pretty sure the system would've flagged it as an invalid contract within an hr... but seriously... ive been handling alibaba (and other) international sourcing since before high school(mainly small businesses i made sites/little tools for that found anything with a light up screen intimidating) and a purchase then shipment to the originating company/factory actually entered into a contract(the form is sooo simple)... im faced with ridiculously improbable obstacles actually existing and changing in such nonsensical statistically improbable ways so often that 1. I wouldn't trust a dr (or most humans) that didnt 1st assume i was crazy of some form...unfortunately im not, despite hkw much simpler and probable itd be 2. Id be super suspicious/converned if statistic norms were my norm for over a day.
But seriously wtf???
Someone give me some wisps of a frame of ref here... where's a typical 'fuck this, im out!' Breaking point?1 -
Dynamic/Dynamically is used WAY to much in programming. What part of programming is NOT dynamic?
https://dictionary.com/browse/...
Depending upon your interpretation of the definition it can just mean: moving parts. Programming is all about moving parts.
I see things like "dynamically allocated array". Wtf does that even mean? (I get it, most likely means on heap) Say it specifically: it was allocated on the stack or the heap.
Apparently some people are just more energetic in their programming...
It becoming a really overused buzzword...8 -
We’re only random people living in random places, speaking random languages, eating random food, sleeping, studying and working random hours. Traveling to random points on a sphere.
Just random range is different.
Just random stuff happens on crossroads of two random dots and the entropy speed ups or slows down.
Nothing special at all.
Just a finite state machine iteration.
I mean the amount of effort we put into explanation of infinity is outstanding.
What if there is no infinity at all ?
What if infinity is just misunderstanding of our interpretation of the world around us. It’s just pixels, resolution, gaussian splatting, quantum state, you name it.
Hey man the world is flat. Just put it to the 2d space. How many space you need from a simulation perspective where your patient eyes can only see up to certain amount of light particles per second on a shitty lens.
Propose a world optimization techniques by slowing down subject perception, tiredness introduced. Compress memory, sleep introduced. Limit neurons, cpu power assigned. Deploy on cloud - put it to life. Exit 0 body failure. Exit 1 suicide. Kill -9 killed by tty from ip EARTH.X.Y
What you can do to make the world around this planet alive? Make it blink.
We developers are lazy and I believe that nature is even more lazy than us.
You think you’re going to elevator right now ? You’re going to the preloader. Looking at the window equals playing video from playback. Never goes live, just precomputed fsm. Cars, trains, airplains ? Preloaders everywhere. Highways to split traffic to cities and communication. The road and cities planning department is a matrix maintenance department. And don’t get me started about space.
Space is empty because it’s not even finished. So they put it all behind glass called milky way. You know how glass looked 500 years ago ? It was milky so it’s milky way so we don’t see shit.
If the space would be finished I’ll be starting writing this text from mars, finished it and sent from earth but no it’s light years guys, light years is not a second for a matter. Light year is a second of the the injected thoughts exchange only. Thoughts of the global computer called generative AI that they introduced on local computing devices called cloud.
Even the preloader system is not present, they left us with the one map and overpopulated demo. What a shit hole.I bet they’re increasing temperature right now to erase this alpha build and cash out. Obviously so many bugs here that his one can’t be fixed anymore. To many viruses.
Hope for 0days to start happening so we can escape using time travel or something.
I bet they cut a budget or something, moved the team to other projects. Or even worse solar system team got layoff off because we are just neurons that ordered to do it. And now we’re stuck in some maintenance mode, no new physics no new thoughts to pursue, just slow degeneration. I would pay more for the next run and switch to other galaxy far far away where they at lest have more modern light speed technology.
What do you think about it Trinity ? Not even worth wasting your time for that. No white rabbit this time.
I do not recommend this game at this stage of early access.
- only one available map despite promises for expansions over the years no single dlc arrived,
- missing space adventures
- no galaxy travel mode only a teaser trailers of what you can do in other “universes”
- developers don’t respond to complains
- despite diversity of species and buildings at first sight world looks to generic
- instead of new features bots with mind manipulation, AB testing and data harvesting was introduced
- death anti cheat mode installed1 -
I've been studying a bit about business analytics and intelligence to diversify a bit from dev.
After a lot of looking around I've found it's all just glorified jargon which basically enables your decision to have backing of facts and logic. It sounds as if it's a great coverup tool but don't know if it actually helped decision-making.
Why does researching the market/competition need to have a thousand breakdowns/categories/focus areas.
I feel like an interpretation of business analytics is a very simple and intuitive solution but there is just too much random and wasteful metrics attached to it.
I believe it's just my nascent knowledge and experience speaking, but I never felt the same way about software development, financials, etc2 -
Massive problem of bizarre disconnected and self aggrandizing or perhaps diminishing bias interpretation wherein history is interpreted not based on history but a strange warped and often retarded manner to mean something completely different.
How do the Borg live and breathe at all without being magically cracktarded every moment of everyday and wandering around like the robot from the dark to tower or a rabid raccoon ?
-
So.
They mill round
Zimmerman states something as an interpretation
This infuriates someone further
Are they totally fucking retarded or just that clueless?
I remember many times that they got their come uppance no pun intended at all.
Top Tags
Weekly Rant
View