prinny_

The value of FE unit testing is inversely proportional to the amount of mocking in said tests. I once worked on a complex admin dashboard with lots of business edge cases. The unit tests for the forms and the settings didn’t have any mocks and therefore we could catch legitimate bugs. On the other hand I have worked on code bases with so much mocking that I couldn’t make the tests to fail by intentionally bricking the component.

AI slopping my config is what allowed me to learn vim without going through the pain of setting it up. I can ask AI to teach me about some motions or set up some configs for m in lua without ever know lua. This is the biggest impact of AI in my professional life.

Does it matter if the response is tone deaf or simply misguided? I am a bit nihilistic here, but in one week absolutely nobody will be talking about this. Are the affected individuals going to abandon instagram? Are people going to reduce their usage out of concern for the safety of their accounts? Nothing will happen, hence there is no need for actual humans writing a good, well intended response.

WASM is not for games specifically, it's for anything that needs native performance but also needs to run on the web.

Interesting. Can you please elaborate more? Is it due to the combination of popular foundation (js) and the addition of strong typing? The runtime environment differences? The ease of integration with other languages / tools?

A word to web devs. I hate your crap.

I would like to say I agree with the proposition of your post and your arguments, but as a web dev please don't mix the state of the web with what the median web dev considers a good UI/UX. We don't make the Jira tickets and if you have worked in a corporate environment you know very well that arguments like "but the UX/accessibility" hold very very little value in the context of most decisions.

I believe there is a middle ground here. Quick calls can definitely mess with your flow in your day to day work, but ruining multiple hours of “in the state” is either an overstatement or the author may be best suited for a different role that demands less communication.

On the other hand modern application of agile methodology is borderline ruinous for team productivity and most of the time exists for a specific stakeholder to feel less anxious rather than for a team member to raise a blocker or a dependency.

I work in a fairly big company and there is the notion of extracting people from their agile teams to have them work uninterrupted on large tech initiatives. Which is in my opinion a subtle way to signal that if you know what you want to build, agile methodology at least in the perverted way most companies apply it doesn’t work.

For people like him who probably already have enough money it’s probably just chasing the opportunity to work at the bedding edge of the field he loves. And maybe get to be the father of AGI.

Only issue is what happens when the company that owns the search and has a dominant share of the browser market flags your site with the good old "warning: potential risk ahead" when people try to reach it directly? And buries the "I know the risk let me through" deep in the browser settings. Advocate for different browsers? Google is pushing web attestation in one form or the other. I wish the future would look bleak, because right now it's looking blue, red, yellow and green and it's worse.

You're allowed to exist on the web. The alternative is you are pushed out, your site is not indexed and google / chrome labels it as a security risk when people are trying to reach it directly. The mandate is clear: give up the data or give up the spot.

Is it expected to be hard? Meta currently employees a lot of people who are willing to be there for any number of reasons. If 2 years down the line Meta announces a hiring push offering the same or better compensation packages with the ones offering now I am sure people will flock to be there.

I think we should put behind us any discourse about companies risking their hiring pool by being hostile to the society or their own employees. People will definitely try to be hired at $company if it means six figure pay, doesn't matter the sector. We have plenty of examples for this.

I doubt AI can educate the masses simply because the masses would have to prompt it to educate them. Almost no one in my social circle knows, let alone understands Google’s recent work on pushing web attestation, or any other tech company’s power plays enforced on us. They are people blindly hitting accept all in every banner that pops up in their online journeys or use chat apps that blatantly spy on them.

They don’t know what they could have or why the new captcha is funny, thus they can never come up with a prompt that leads to them being educated on the matter. They would have to know that they don’t know and since there is no public discourse for such matters in their Facebook timelines, their thinly right wing digital news outlets and their Viber and what’s app chats they will never know that they don’t know.

I have been following zed for quite some time and I use it daily alongside nvim (haven’t yet tried zed vim mode, planning to). I really like the performance and control zed provides, as well as the reduced UI clutter compared to alternatives. The collaborator functionality is not talked enough by the community but I believe it’s an ambitious idea worth pursuing. Wishing the team all the best.

I think it’s a nice feature. I use it to have designs on one part of the screen and implementation on the other. That way I can jump between “designs | implementation” and “PR | swagger” without managing and resizing tabs. Previously I had to jump between tabs and taking into account the newer screens provide a considerable amount of UI real estate there was screen area to utilize.

Vercel promises to engineer the pain away when it comes to deployment. The thing however is that Vercel introduced that pain in the first place by writing sub-par documentation and splitting many of NextJS functions into small parts with different cost.

Everyone trash talking the JS ecosystem without contributing the slightest to the conversation would benefit a lot if they read https://www.artmann.co/articles/30-years-of-br-tags in order to understand the evolution of the language and its tooling.

Nobody argues what we currently have is great and that we shouldn't look to improve it. Reducing it to "JS developers bad" is an embarrassing statement and just shows ignorance, not only of the topic at hand, but of an engineering mindset in general.

I believe if you read this article https://www.artmann.co/articles/30-years-of-br-tags your "wtf is wrong with js developers" question will be answered.

Unrelated to the topic at hand but related to the technologies mentioned. I weep for Redux. It's an excellent tool, powerful, configurable, battle tested with excellent documentation and maintainer team. But the community never forgave it for its initial "boilerplate-y" iterations. Years passed, the library evolved and got more streamlined and people would still ask "redux or react context?" Now it seems this has carried over to Claude as well. A sad turn of events.

Redux is boring tech and there is a time and place for it. We should not treat it as a relic of the past. Not every problem needs a bazooka, but some problems do so we should have one handy.

I have "default for all websites: block audio" in my firefox settings and that site still played music.

There is a world where approaches like HTTP 402 are implemented to monetize API usage.

The previous company I was working at had quite a lot of TCL code for their back end logic. Betting sector, well known in US and Europe. They still actively hire people to maintain the codebase. Rock solid code, no surprises, was able to handle tens of thousands of concurrent bets.

People in this thread hating on React seem to miss the crucial point that 2016 React was a godsend compared to just about every other option available. Vue only picked up steam quite later as React became more and more bloated or had its development forced by Vercel down a certain road. Angular was THE framework to avoid working on and people hated having to define multiple files for a simple component. The timing for React was just right back in the day.

Given how FEs are re-written every 7-10 years there is ample room for other frameworks to knock React off its throne, but before asking "but why not X" you also have to consider that organizations by now have almost a decade of experience building React apps and this plays a major role when deciding on which UI framework to rely on.

I believe we are having this discussion from a purely technical perspective and not from a business one. Let's take slack for example. Assuming a company can perfectly clone it, why would they? Yes they would skip paying for it, but they would have to maintain it, starting from its infrastructure all they way up to its UI. Will they think of new features? Will they follow industry developments in sound / streaming technology? Will they keep integrating other tools into it? I am sure they would rather pay to have somebody else do it for them, someone like slack itself.

Also, assuming a company has the capital to burn through enough tokens to create something so big and complex, why spend it on an internal tool? Shouldn't they be spinning slack-sized apps to expand their existing market share or try to disrupt new markets?

The way I see it using tmux to orchestrate multiple agents is an intermediate step until we get a UI that can be a product offering. Assuming we get orchestration to the level it has been touted, there is a world where tmux is unnecessary for the user. You would just type something to one panel in which the "overlord" agent is running (the "mayor" if we talking gas town lingo) and that agent will handle all the rest. I doubt jumping between panes is going to stick around as the product offering evolves.

Does it count if I share my experience with AI and nvim? I use it to update my configuration, discover new plugins, write custom lua code (I don't know lua) and inquire about motions that would help me in specific workflows. I started learning vim motions last summer and AI really lowered the entry barrier and allowed me to focus on the motions rather than the setup.

Also related to my nvim workflow but not strictly vim related: I use AI to write and update a bash script that handles tmux windows. Again, it lowered the barrier to entry and it made switching to nvim as my primary editor easier.

This is an incredibly cringe article. From using “wolf” in a completely forced way, to full quoting a conversation that seemingly only misses “and that testing framework’s name? Albert Einstein”.

I built a new pc for gaming 2 years ago with windows 11 and I can’t see myself using this OS again when I retire it. From randomly losing Bluetooth, to keyboard resets, to the hilarious failure that is the new right click menu (which lags a bit before appearing, something that I find hilarious) it’s just a bad user experience through and through. My new pc will either run Linux or be a Mac mini. Hopefully Linux gaming will continue to improve and I will be able to completely ditch windows once and for all.

I also used to read my commute but stopped it after I finished "for whom the bell tolls". I was so moved that I ended up crying in the bus and I would have liked to experience that feeling in the privacy of my home rather in the morning bus with 9 hours still on the clock.

I can only hope that this degradation of UX will make more people switch or consider switching to other distributions. It's the only thing that will make microsoft listen.

The lack of evidence before attributing the attack(s) to a Chinese sponsored group makes me correlate this report with recent statements from companies in the AI space about how China is about to surpass US in the AI race. Ultimately statements and reports like these seem more like an attempt to make the US government step in and be the big investor that keeps the money flowing rather than anything else.