adamconroy

There only 4 hard things in computer science. Caching, naming things and off by one errors.

I don't know, nothing lasts forever, and one might 'die' at the hand of the other. It could easily happen through acquisition as he says.

Jaron is very good at articulating his ideas. He is preaching to the choir with me though. I was somewhat addicted to Twitter, but snapped out of it 7 years ago, and find the idea of using one of those networks tiresome.

so the spoofer distributing these devices is going to all this trouble/expense/risk in the hope there is a http downloaded exe it can corrupt, then hopes the hashing doesn't fail on that corrupt exe, and hopes the user ignores the untrusted source warning so that it can install a trojan?

it might redirect to a malicious web page, but https would still prevent a problem. perhaps read the article you posted.

I don't see how this 'man' in the middle could actually intercept passwords, except for http, but who runs auth over http anyway. For https, the 'man' would have to substitute its own certificate and then the browser / client software wouldn't trust the cert/domain combination without the end user being extremely stupid (and knowledgeable enough to achieve the stupidity).

Analogies are good at explaining difficult to understand concepts but shouldn't be used to arrive at decisions or axioms. Each situation or argument should be evaluated on its own. In other words, whilst the jazz festival and facebook models are analogously similar, just because you accept one as harmless doesn't mean the other isn't harmful.

Spidey sense didn't detect these problems then?

As always, it depends. Personally I have been working for a corporation where we use a microservice approach and it has been great for productivity, turn around times on projects, and the systems/services are quite easy to understand. We are full CI. Our microservices maybe aren't as micro as others, we have a pattern of having monolith 'data services' and micro business/functional/api services. The monolith 'data service', effectively a layer that exposes CRUD over data, in some cases has 10 microservices that interface. I could go on and on, but it works very well for us.

I call it TDD. Trend driven development.

I scratch around passing time on the internet, but then if I'm not doing that I'm passing time watching cable tv, passing time playing chess, passing time smoking pot, passing time reading novels, passing time playing golf, passing time laughing frivolously, passing time sleeping, passing time day dreaming, passing time eating, passing time shopping, passing time chatting on the phone......

Basically, I pass my days in my idle ways, and I don't think it matters what the medium. I can say that I don't pass my days on social media, its tedious.

I read this in a drug information pamphlet a long time ago; basically it said that cocaine and heroin both bind to a different set of receptors to the other, but alcohol binds to both. Which is what makes it uniquely addictive. Its obviously not as strong as either of those drugs but combines the nature of both.

Maybe it has had its day. It influenced the mindset of the masses and is now mainstream. There is no alt anymore. Even Microsoft ships software that leverages newtonsoft.json

Yes, its generally much faster to have a quick conversation rather than reply to an email.

The blurting has no bounds. I recently had someone tell me over slack that the company is contemplating a spin-off, blurting out a few lines describing the strategy, and asked if I could get back to them on possible system implementations / integrations / ideas. There were blurts along the lines of, 'and if we can't find a saas offering to integrate with, we might have to build our own, but maybe we should make it generic because there could be a market for it.....'. I was basically thinking, 'how about you fucking idiots carefully document a well considered, serious proposal, and then ask my advice. Or invite me to a brain-storming session, in person, so we have an actual discussion.'

That's a great title for a self-help book. I'll read it once I finish 'How to look out the window'. It never occurred to me that obsessive email checking could be a distraction or a negative thing, but now someone has done a study of 124 people it has made me sit up and think, but alas I can't figure out how to stop so I'll need someone to tell me.

AV software is a great example of a cure being worse than the disease

Not a surprise to me, their HDDs are junk. I've had two burn out in work machines and one personal external burn out. I never buy their gear anymore

shouldn't he be saying i fucked up?

That blog post could pretty much apply the same arguments to itself. And who knows if Bob's experience is simply correlation not causation. Perhaps Bob is just a smart, meticulous engineer, and it wouldn't matter how he went about his dev work, the quality may be good regardless.

the necks got off their sundecks it seems

Yes, although fortunately for me my wife has become friendly with a lot of my mates' wives / girlfriends, so we still catch up when they organize things.

And quite possibly the whole system was replaced within a few years and it turned out that management were correct in not letting your team waste the organization's money trying to be purists, and probably over-engineering at the same time.

I've always thought that 'debt' is a poor analogy. Systems get replaced / rewritten / superseded / thrown in the bin... all time, and that is where the debt analogy fails.

Its obviously semantics, and I'm not advocating sloppy programming / architecture, but the term is both inaccurate and leads people to blinkered thinking.

i don't agree that CLR vs .NET versions are confusing. .NET is the CLR plus a pile of libraries. The CLR moves slowly, the non-clr parts of .NET iterate faster. I rarely even think about the CLR version at all. It was a minor consideration 10 years ago when CLR 1->2, but even then it was somewhat of a theoretical point that was basically handled by the version of .NET you targeted.

Hey, ingve. stop trolling us. you wasted 5 minutes of my life by posting this.

that's a good thread.

Excuse me, no jokes please.

When people (such as this author) talk about mocks, are they talking about mocking and testing behavior or just simply fakes / doubles?

My understanding of mocking by example is: you have a class you want to test, and that class has a dependency on lets say a Mail class that has a SendMail() method. You mock the Mail class and assert that SendMail() was called as per your specification.

Given that definition of mocking, I personally don't like mocking. I prefer to test state not behavior, although I can see in some scenarios behavior is more important.

that sounds like the plot of the final episode of a reasonably successful sitcom.