I've written two different real time audio resampling algos (called on source and called on target) using linear interpolation, both in typescript, both work on first try and both perform great. I feel like the omniscient god of web audio processing.

First rant incoming!

I love when bizDEV people who are clearly not technical try to be technical. I mean I get when you want to try and understand something and I am totally down for letting you in on why we (the engineers) decided to do something a certain way. When you then go and tell us “no” and give the reason of “because I said so” it really doesn’t still well. Then you wonder why we don’t want to talk to you about anything? I mean it doesn’t take a genius to figure out you know nothing about anything we are doing but sure, why don’t we just go along with your plan because you are totally omniscient.

Then he decided that he wants to be in all the “idea” discussions... I really don’t understand because my ideas are not scheduled and I am not going to set up a meeting and write them down for later so you can feel needed and important.

This project had such a good chance of becoming something great but I have a bad feeling it’s going to fail now because non technical people are in charge of technical decisions.

End of rant, thanks for listening.

People have a hard time realizing we do have to cover (at least try) all the possibilities... Yes ma'am I do have to know everything beforehand...

Honestly idk but that one chapter from mythical man month, "Plan to Throw One Away", stuck with me:

"Where a new system concept or new technology is used, one has to build a system to throw away, for even the best planning is not so omniscient as to get it right the first time."

In my current project I've seen this play out, initial development was very prototype-ish and just not well designed but when we got a somewhat decent state we had to continue with it instead of starting again and doing it properly. And now the consequences of that are hitting, progress for new features is incredibly slow, the software is very error prone, a bunch of dead code all around, ...

Requirements for achieving omniscience!
Complete courses without registering for them!

Whenever someone praises a language or framework to be the holy grail of programming, I like to think of epicurus' problem:

1. If an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent programming language exists, then all the hundreds of other PLs would not.

2. There are a fuckton of PLs in the world.

3. Therefore, an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent programming language does not exist.

My shitting streak has begun again. Fuck. Its cold where i live and in my house. Shitting liquid shit doesnt help because my asshole burns. Its not fun and not enjoyable. Im trying to hold shit inside me but it forces me to shit. And if i shit it burns. Imagine being in a cold -75° weather while your asshole is burning heat at +45°. Why is life such a constant stream of pain and suffering. I write this as i sit on the toilet and fight demons not to shit more in order to prevent pain

Why did our designer invent shitting and thought it was a good idea?

I can think of a better idea: whatever i eat gets dissolved into particles by acid that my body produces like an implosion inside a submarine and transforms into pure energy that my body absorbs and thus makes the body more powerful -- no need to shit it out because its now a bunch of fucking particles!

WHY wouldnt that be a better solution. Shitting is disgusting and makes no sense if this solution is also possible. And for an omniscient all-powerful all-knowing celestial being -- NOTHING is impossible to do.

what we perceive as "magic" is normal to an all-powerful celestial entity. Therefore any thought you can imagine, should be possible to do. Even the idea i just proposed because i proved i could imagine it so it must be possible to create such existence

And as i finish writing off this rant, my asshole burns less and everything is coming back to normal Thank God. The pain was bearly bareable. As a finishing touch of this rant imma go wipe my ass for 100th time today and continue working with nextjs on my project

Hey everyone, I want to showcase today a master class in divisiveness.

The topic, the white house has just reacted to the "Elon is not elected" allegations. Explaining in a "civics lesson," that only the president is elected, the rest of his staff appointed. A good point, on the surface.

But also, a master class of divisiveness. From both sides.

May I introduce our characters: We have Smart Left (SL), Dumb Left (DL), Smart Right (SR), and Dumb Right (DR).

And me, Tray, your omniscient (read, unreliable) narrator.

Scene 1, act 1 - The left side:
SL enters stage, below him a crowd of DL.
SL: "Elon is not elected!"
Tray: "SL was not malicious, he did mean it. He knew how government works. It is but an ironic jab, pointing out his believe Elon having more influence over Trump than vice versa. Looking down at the DLs, they did not understand it."
DLs take up the chant: "Elon is not elected."

Act 1 Scene 2 - The right side.
DRs irritated about the accusation.
SR: "It is called an appointment."
Tray: "SR is aware what SL meant, however an explanation is warranted for DL. Yet, is it already misleading not to point out that SL knew? The original accusation remained unanswered. That doesn't mean it is correct, nor incorrect. It only means that it is most advantageous to not draw attention to it."
DRs chant: "Lefties need civic lesson."

Act 1 Scene 3 - The left side.
DLs: Outraged about being lectured at.
SL: "Of course we know about appointments, that is just a straw man attack."
Tray. "SL is aware that many of their own do need a civics lesson."
DLs chant: "Straw man Trump, straw man Trump."

Act 1 Scene 4 - The right side:
SR: "The accusation of straw manning is insulting. They make claims and do not stand to them."
Tray: "Also here a malicious act. They could explain their original target audience. But they do not want to give an inch, not admitting a point the other side made.
DRs chant: "Straw manning left. Straw manning left."

And that's the drama in 4 scenes. We are at scene 2 right now. But that's just a single act. The original accusation was not debated. Neither by L nor by R. The accusation was always dominated by the chants of those who carry the the prefix "D" in the name. "S" doesn't speak to "S." "S" only speaks to "D." Has to be, they have to react to the loudest.

It is in the nature of democracy. If all of our voices are worth the same, then bigger clusters of voices are more important. We should not assume that truthfulness and scientific rigor will prevail. After all, in human's evolutionary history, science and engineering was hampered by people and only developed to this degree because the environment positively selected for it. After all, being correct is a survival advantage. Democracy does not select for being correct, but for creating the biggest unity.