flustercan

Are you asking the author to validate your own opinion? Why don't you explain why you think its slop and provide some evidence to back up your assertions and we can have a real discussion.

Lucy/Football

As a longtime developer currently perusing their first computer science degree, it makes me happy that I understood this article. Nearly makes all the trouble seem worth it.

Junior engineers should spend half their time doing customer support.

It allows them to provide meaningful value to the company without needing to code, it shows them a customer first approach to the product, it teaches them empathy for users and the CS team. It also teaches them repro/debugging skills.

I've never worked anywhere where the role of a Sr was to glue together a bunch of small pieces written by a team of Jr devs.

I've only worked places where Jr's were given roughly the same scope of work as a mid-level dev but on non-critical projects where they could take as much time as necessary and where mistakes would have a very small blast radius.

That type of Jr work has not been made redundant - although I suppose now its possible for a PM or designer to do that work instead (but if your PMs are providing more value by vibe coding non-critical features than by doing their PM work maybe you don't really need a PM?)

If we can keep the price of homes flat for 10 years then homeowners won't get hosed (still increasing equity by paying off principle) and homes get more affordable (assuming steady inflation and wage growth)

If a hotel could offer me a house like experience I would definitely be interested.

I agree with the sentiment that Airbnbs are weird with the checkout chores and lack of regulation, but when traveling with friends I find it so much more enjoyable to be able to hang out and cook dinner and watch TV together rather than all being cramped in one couple's studio sitting on the beds and eating out every meal.

You sound like someone who has developed a good work ethic and is comfortable with struggle. Likely because you didn't grow up with a magic thinking box to ask for help at the first bit of mental friction.

None of these things are related to age or amount of experience. Someone with 20 years of mediocre experience will be mediocre, and they may also have a false sense of their own ability because they've managed to scrape by for so long.

"None of that shit matters" in purely thermodynamic sense, but it matters immensely to the actual goal of getting people to be healthier by having less body fat. In that sense, CICO is an oversimplification.

I personally don't think that anyone without enough will power and discomfort tolerance to feel hungry for long periods of time when surrounded by limitless food should be forced to live a shorter more painful life.

The key to getting people to quit smoking is for them to stop smoking. Very simple. Why on earth do we have nicotine gum and patches?

I am literally looking at a port with many containers and a fully loaded ship waiting to unload more containers at the port of Seattle right this second.

(based on other replies I guess I'm not the only one in Pioneer Square lol)

People care immensely about having a job. If tariffs mean that businesses don't hire as much or do layoffs then this is a big deal for most people. The unemployment rate doesn't even need to go up that much to have a huge effect on people's general feeling about the economy.

I'm much more concerned about someone going 40mph in a 25 zone than someone going 110 in a 75.

Ehh the roads are public property. I don't think its unreasonable that if you want your car to be registered to drive on a public road it needs some sort of speed limiter. Its about the same level of infringement on your personal rights as requiring a car have seatbelts. Feel free to buy a car with no limiter or no seatbelts and drive it on your own private roads as fast as your heart desires.

Its a cool car, but forgive me for not getting Lucy-Footballed again by an electric car startup claiming to be able to "change the game" while never actually getting any cars sold.

Its Japan. I bet you will be able to eat off the ground in there years from now.

That power comes from the idea that the federal employees can shut down government operations if they stop working. This administration (supposedly) wants dearly to shut down government operations, so the union doesn't have any power.

Addicts literally carry around fent testing kits so they can _avoid_ this synthetic opioid.

Its my understanding that heroin and street pharmaceuticals aren't really around anymore. Its ALL fentanyl now and everyone knows it.

You get better at what you practice.

If you practice unproductive social interactions and unhealthy coping skills all day, you will get better at unproductive social interactions and unhealthy coping skills.

Sounds like we agree, enforce all the laws.

I have noticed that some people who hold your views believe that there are processes whereby illegitimate laws get nullified and until those processes are followed the law should be followed. Do you hold to this view?

Yeah sorta, my point was more about enforcement than compliance. I don't necessarily think unjust laws should be followed but it certainly should not be up to each individual police officer to decide which laws gets enforced on which people.

If a law is unjust enough and enough people choose to disobey it and the legal system is forced to get involved constantly then I believe we would see a lot more change in the law than with our current system of writing laws then letting cops selectively enforce them.

Furthermore I would ask are there any laws that you would consider illegitimate? If so what are you doing personally to overturn those?

Yes, just about any restriction on abortion. What am I doing? Not much other than voting, occasionally donating money, and choosing to never live in a state that writes those laws. Would what I do change if there were, say, a national abortion ban? Probably, but I certainly won't count on the police joining in on whatever form of protest I see fit.

I don't think the laws around shoplifting, public intoxication, vandalism, etc. are bad and I am doing nothing to overturn them.

Given the necessity to uphold the law that you believe in (meaning you believe in the necessity above other things) was I under an obligation to tell the police that the homeless guy asked me for money, and that I gave it to him?

No, but the cops who saw you do it were obliged to follow whatever procedure was written into the law. Does SLC still have this law? Having been involved in the enforcement of this law, were you more aware that the law existed and you wanted it changed?

The laws are written democratically, then enforced dictatorially by the whim of a few individuals with a gun. I think this is bad.

All I want is for the laws on the books to be enforced. If a majority decides those laws are bad, they should be taken off the books.

Its currently against the law to litter, shoplift, vandalize, defecate in public, be visibly intoxicated in public, and store private property in public spaces. I think we should enforce those laws.

Should some of those laws be rewritten or abandoned? Maybe! But simply ignoring active laws is the definition of lawlessness and I don't want to live in a lawless community.

There is quite a lot of space in between "I think having laws is good, actually" and "embrace of dictatorship and oppression" but I guess this wouldn't be an internet board discussion without hyperbolic statements.

yet the problem was still bad.

My reading of the comment is that homelessness was not solved but ruthless enforcement made the issues related to homelessness less bad for everyone else who wasn't homeless.

System 1 (permissiveness): Bad for a small percentage of people and sorta bad for everyone else.

System 2 (strict enforcement): Really bad for a small percentage of people, neutral bad for everyone else.

System 3 (theoretical): Everything works pretty well for everyone.

Obviously system 3 is the best option, but it doesn't exist currently in any society anywhere on earth (maybe Japan?) System 2 seems to be the next best option to use while we keep trying to find a workable system 3.

I think it can disrupt only knowledge jobs

What happens when a huge chunk of knowledge workers lose their job? Who is going to buy houses, roofs, cars, cabinets, furniture, amazon packages, etc. from all the the blue-collar workers?

What happens when all those former knowledge workers start flooding the job markets for cashiers and factory workers, or applying en masse to the limited spots in nursing schools or trade programs?

If GPTs take away knowledge work at any rate above "glacially slow" we will quickly see a collapse that affects every corner of the global economy.

At that point we just have to hope for a real revolution in terms of what it means to own the means of production.

G&T was a great way for me to learn a smug sense of superiority over my classmates and believe that inherit ability is more important to success than hard work.

That being said - in most of my non honors classes kids would get made fun of for doing the work or knowing an answer. G&T was nice not because the curriculum was so much different, but rather because it created space where the kids who liked learning could be left in peace.

I hope so.

Also possible: "Wow people are still paying good money for our sucky software. I guess we never needed good software nor good developers."

I don't think its common for people to try to "memorize leetcode."

Most interview loops at places that do algorithm interviews are 2-3 rounds and each round will have up to 2 questions. Its very very unlikely the interviewee will only encountered questions they have memorized.

More likely, the interviewee encounters questions similar to ones they have solved and they know the pattern around solving, then are able to apply their learned skill to the new problem.

Similar to your music analogy: you can absolutely be a strong guitar player in a band if you just memorize a few different chord shapes and can apply them up and down the fretboard to different keys (lookup the "CAGED system").

Some people consider the PR the unit of work, not the commit. I don't really agree but I think its a reasonable way to do things if you are squashing the PR before merging. The problem is the size.

I don't see how taking it file by file lowers the complexity. If a file introduces a new method and that method it used 10 times in different files throughout the PR, looking at the 1 file doesn't really tell me much. This is compounded when those other 10 files have other changes unrelated to whatever new function I'm trying to review.

We have good unit test coverage and a decent deployment process so I'm rarely concerned about something seriously breaking, its more trying to answer the question "is this approach reasonable" or "could this be done more simply" that I find really hard to answer when there are so many changes bundled together.

It wouldn't matter in this case. Its usually 1 1500 line commit in a PR, or its a couple of commits but they aren't meaningful ("write large feature", "review updates", "wip", "merge branch X", etc)