candeira

I've been consulting a long time, and my home is my office.

Besides the uses other people have suggested, here are some uses I would have for a fast symmetrical connection:

- Backing up data to my home/office NAS while away.

- Remoting to my workstation desktop from any location, for any reason.

- Using my home as a Tailscale exit node for clients for whom it's already a hassle to allowlist my home office's IP, so I can work from anywhere.

- Switching my nixos configuration using the caches in my home office where my custom derivations are built.

I have 90Mbps down and 20Mbps up. All of the above is workable but it would be great, amazing if it were faster.

The remote places I would do this from:

- the doctors' waiting room because we have teenagers

- the bleachers of the pool for the diving lessons because we have teenagers

- the in-laws spare bedroom where we're visiting for an extended time during school holidays but not work holidays because we have teenagers.

Some of us have different needs, under choices that we make that are optimal for other aspects of our life but not for having a slower asymmetric connection at home.

Australia here we come.

Yes. However, I already carry a tethered hand-me-down quarantine phone where I install my work apps and undesirable apps like Whatsapp (for those loved friends and family that can't or won't install Signal). Carrying a third phone for "Play Integrity" starts being a bit much.

Dude shipped flamegraphs (which he also created in 2011) for cloud GPU loads and persuaded internal stakeholders to release the code as open source.

The "interviewed by the WSJ" line is for managers. Reading between the lines, I'd say he did really well and, if he didn't do better, it's because the organisation didn't let him.

Seems like there's a misunderstanding on my part here. <reads more>

Ah, the memory is integrated in the same package (the "chip" that gets soldered onto the motherboard) as the integrated CPU/GPU, and I had understood that correctly. However, I had incorrectly surmised that it was built into the same silicon die.

Thanks for the correction!

Lesson: TIL about the difference between System-In-a-Package (SIP) and System-On-a-Chip, and how I had misunderstood the Apple Silicon M series processors to be SoCs when they're SiPs.

I could be wrong about this but, if I had a guess, I'd say the 24GB M5 chips/systems exist due to binning.

Apple is designing and manufacturing a chip/chipset/system with 32GB with integrated memory. During QA, parts that have one non-conformant 8GB internal module out of the four are reused in a cheaper (but still functional) 24GB product line rather than thrown away.

Market segmentation also has its hand in how the final products are priced and sold, but my strong guess is that, if Apple could produce 32GB systems with perfect yield, they would, and the 24GB system would not exist.

This is a great shader intro tutorial!

A friend of mine had an art studio at the Nicholas Building, and I got to speak with a jeweller who told me that he still did a lot of bespoke work in wedding rings, especially for tradies who would otherwise wear down store-bought rings because they were solid gold and therefore softer. I don't remember the details, but he specialised in harder alloys that are nevertheless mostly gold, and therefore "good as gold" for a wedding ring.

Would that be your partner?

Cute!

The downturn was brutal, but the drop in development was also needed.

At the height of the property bubble around 2005-2007, Spain (pop ~44M) was building more units per year than Germany, France and the UK (combined pop. ~195M).[1]

During the GFC Spain suffered from population shrinkage [2], surfeit of available housing stock, and the economic crunch pushed into the market some of the housing stock that would previously have been kept in reserve, so yeah, it wasn't necessarily a bad thing that building activities slowed down.

[1] I don't have a source, because I learnt this from a bunch of attendees to a conference on concrete (yes, the kind you use for building) in Madrid in 2007. We exchanged impressions on how software conferences (PyCon forever!) are different from the ones in the building industry, and they shared some eye opening statistics.

[2] https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/ESP/spain/population

It's definitely coding, if we understand "coding" as "writing code". It's writing text in a text editor to generate an outcome, programmatically.

Also, CSS with animations is now Turing-complete. So yeah, writing HTML/CSS is programming.

Yes, yes and yes.

The failure mode of educational systems and institutions is to perform selection of students more likely to require less help in learning, rather than bear the burden of having to perform actual instruction.

Survivor bias takes care of promoting the educational system or institution with successful alumni, whether the alumni were taught while they were students, or merely selected during the application process.

"defector.com" and not "defecator.com"?

You're welcome to write it yourself.

Something you'll see by reading the overview is the part where the Zig team themselves warn you that Zig is not a fully safe language and link to articles describing the safety boundaries. Scroll to the bottom of this section:

https://ziglang.org/learn/overview/#performance-and-safety-c...

The carbon cost of extraction and transportation of fuel should also be added to the spreadsheet, both for nuclear and for fossil fuel generation.

Finally, if we're accounting for the cost decommissioning old nuclear stations and long-term storage of nuclear fuel, we should also account for the externalities of fossil fuel power, such as health consequences of pollution, the existential risk from global warming, and turmoil due to geopolitical tensions.

I wish I could go into the site and edit the headline to read "Australian spy agency disrupts foreign interference into election" to prevent ambiguity and reduce backtracking by readers.

My explanation of the base rate fallacy is that most car crashes are caused by people who hold a valid driver's permit. The number of crashes caused by unlicensed drivers is negligible. Therefore, we should stop issuing driving licenses.

Most people I explain this to recognise the fallacy, even if they're not trained in statistics.

A huge problem with vaccine denialism is that it stems from motivated thinking. People aren't being persuaded by bullshit arguments; rather, they already agree with the conclusions, and look to these spurious correlations as emotional support.

I saw videos of gyroscopic wheelchairs at the time, and they are as awesome today as I remembered them!

My skepticism was rather about Segway, the product, being useful as a mobility device, and recognised as such by European regulators.

I met some of the people working on regulatory advice so Segways could be used in Europe. This would be about 2003 or 2004, at Campus Party in Valencia, Spain.

The story they told me is that Segway was going to be successful in the USA as a mobility scooter for the elderly, giving range and speed to people who could not walk or cycle far and fast, while not still requiring a traditional wheelchair.

From memory, the strategy was to get the Segway classified as a mobility/accessibility device, which would gain regulatory exemptions and access to funding from public health. They were lobbying the EU with their left hand, and running Segway demonstrations at TV-friendly events like Campus Party with their right hand.

I don't know how much these people believed that this would work in the EU. I didn't believe it. But they weren't getting paid for believing it, nor for persuading me. They were getting paid for telling everyone about it.

The motivation for explicit allocation is explicitness, not adaptability. The adaptability is great, but it's a consequence of the language designer's design principle that all function calls will be explicit via (), and all allocation will be explicit via allocator-passing, so no user of a library can be surprised that a call performs an allocation.

I was wondering why the episodes on the corecursive feed start at number 5.

I'll check your hosted episodes on Software Engineering Daily now!

Can I be the "lazy person" and ask which are the author's points?!

Yes, you can, and I can be the hurried person with no time to summarise, and recommend you read the book yourself. It's not like those business books that have a single thesis, backed by 100 examples to support it, where the thesis itself can be written on the back of a stamp.

I can however try and describe to you what the book is about.

It's a book about how legacy software interventions are about the people as much as about the code and the machines, with advice for aligning incentives between stakeholders, developers and managers,

It's about prioritising competing goals under different sets of constraints, with useful advice for ensuring psychological safety in your team.

It's about measuring risk, and acting on the measurements.

It's about anthropology of software-using organisations, and about organisational design, and how those disciplines inform the job of recovering wayward software projects. It's not a book about computers, or about programming, or even about software management. It's about people in organisations doing all of the above.

It's about defining the right job to do lest you attempt to do the wrong job right.

It reads like an instant classic, like a "missing manual" for running software development operations in big organisations... but with advice that's also applicable at smaller scales.

I just finished reading it and I started on Chapter 1 again. It's that good.

Given what I saw in my grandmother when she became ill with dementia, I don't see a much worst case. Maybe if she had survived for longer in an even slower decline... but heart meds already gave us that.

I'm currently reading Marianne Bellotti's Kill It With Fire, which is about upgrading and maintaining legacy projects. It's more about meta-software-architecture (how to think about choosing and replacing architectures) than about software architecture itself.

It's very well written and full of useful insights for practitioners, while using language and descriptions that would be approachable to the layperson. This seems like a book that an engineering manager and a product owner can read together to better understand the shared endeavour of upgrading a legacy service.

Halfway through Chapter 3, I haven't learned anything I didn't know... but on the other hand, I find myself in violent agreement with each one of the author's points. And though it's a book that's well written and could be a breezy read, I find myself stopping to ponder on he consequences of each paragraph.

One great aspect of this book is that Bellotti was trained as anthropologist, and she brings the analytical tools of her studies to the human aspects of software development. The book offers a vocabulary/framework for the software development process, legacy or not, and better models for framing our own professional experiences when approaching client work.

Heartily recommended.

Yes, and I understood his point because, as a business-minded software engineer, I can map the edit-run-test-debug process to what he calls a tight loop (the Maths Test).

I also recognise the fuzzier process of designing features with stakeholders, implementing them, deploying them and having them tested in the market as something between the Rocket Launch (for the technical process from ideation to deployment and subsequent maintenance) and Stock Picking (for the product/market fit).

To finish populating the 2x2 matrix, the Novice Bowler approach is more similar to what many of the students used to do back when I was tutoring Algorithms and Data Structures at uni. They'd throw things at the IDE until it compiled, and call it a day.

In the spirit of Python's "Exceptions are when the runtime didn't know what to do, and Errors are when the programmer didn't know what to do", I'd say "rely on crashes for exceptions, but validate data against errors".

Dan answered earnestly and generously to some uninformed questions I emailed him at random one day.

He was a good man. My condolences to his friends and family.

I didn't literally mean the atmosphere had a limited capacity to hold this much CO2 and no more.

Please add "without existential-level consequences", which was the implied meaning.

We are currently running out of atmosphere to dump the CO2 from burning the oil into.