I really liked it, even though I didn't use any of the AI stuff. Then they just keep pushing the AI harder and harder, and I finally stopped and figured out how to configure the Win11 Terminal app "good enough" and dropped it.
I was in camp 'boolean', but I think this has convinced me. I always had a problem that there were developers who didn't really understand the code, but would click 'approve' anyhow because they didn't see any problems in the parts they understood.
This meant that they were completely unable to actually 'approve' a review, but were only able to reject it. They were juniors, so they'd eventually get to that point, but by then, everyone would be used to just ignoring their approvals.
Sure, it depends more than code review, but the code review is still a boolean flag, i.e. BOOLEAN getsMerged = codeReview && passesCI && passesTests....
Unless you're implying codeReview is a score and a low code review score can be offset by higher scores elsewhere eg. passes more tests?????
"There is also this notebook that features a map, which is included in the Instagram post but is nowhere to be found on the website. The map is too blurry to make out properly, but the geography looks inconsistent with other maps of Middle-earth."
Absolutely unconscionable.
Ads need to be truthful. They can't just make things up that aren't actually in the product. It's literally false advertising.
I'm not against AI, but I am against deceiving people. If you can't be bothered to actually check your AI's output, you shouldn't be using it.
Clicking the image expands it. Looks like the real thing to me (and easy enough when you've got the rights; to use AI for this would have been idiotic)
> "There is also this notebook that features a map, which is included in the Instagram post but is nowhere to be found on the website. The map is too blurry to make out properly, but the geography looks inconsistent with other maps of Middle-earth."
It's very 2026. I had my AI give me a two paragraph summary of the LOTR, so I could be knowledgeable about it. Then I had it check the map, and it said it was fine, so I'm happy.
There's a difference between using a thing and understanding how it works. There's a lot of stuff in this that reference things that only hardware and software creators are going to understand, and only if they're deep enough into their craft.
"Interrupts", for example, are an old concept that is rarely talked about anymore until you get into low-level programming. At a high level, you don't even think about them, let alone talk about them.
I think that's exactly the point. They've charged you $2 to process the request. They did that work. Even if you get the money back for the event, they still did the job, so they won't refund the service fee.
This is exactly my problem. It's easy enough to say "give it away if you won't use it soon" but how do you know? That urge might come on any time, and the act of giving it away is likely to reignite that passion.
And for small things, like cables you don't often use... You never know when you'll need them. I've been telling myself I'm just going to throw them away after all, but then within a month of deciding that, I end up using a cable that I hadn't even seen in 2 years, and I had to hunt pretty hard for it. And it's a $10+ cable.
The article sounds like it's going to address these issues with the dots, but then just doesn't. I'm actually not even sure what the point of the dots is other than to convince the author that they're doing something about their problem, when they're really just putting stickers on things and buying more bins.
Pick a dollar amount and delivery time period you are comfortable with. Get rid of everything you haven’t used in a month that you can get cheaper than that amount and within that time period.
Dont justify after the fact just dumbly implement the rule.
I can think of two instances from the past year or two where this happened: "printer cable" (USB-A to USB-B?), and USB-A extension cable (both at separate times). I think I spent ~$10 for each of these, so my total bill was $20.
So $20 fee to pay for getting rid of a bunch of other cables I didn't need years ago and saving ~500 cubic cm of space.
And I gave the printer cable away to a friend when I was done with it, happy to repurchase it in a few years in the increasingly unlikely scenario that I need it again.
Yeah, after years and years of hoarding lots of hardware and cables that's how I operate now. I have so much less tech trash in my house now, LOL.
Keep a few extra cables of sorts I actually use fairly often (a few spare HDMI cables, some ethernet cables, and a few types of USB cables are no-brainers, for instance). Toss all the rest (am I ever, ever going to use a DVI cable again in my life? Decent odds, no, and on the off chance I do I can just buy another)
Any cable that's more than ~2 spares for a port on some device that is plugged in or otherwise in-use in your house, or isn't a kind of port you've used in a couple years (even if you could) should at least get some serious scrutiny and more often than not be donated or go in the trash.
Like, I held on to a couple coax cables more than ten years after the last time I plugged anything into a coax jack. So stupid, in hindsight.
The dollar amount and delivery time is a good rule is a good one. This varies quite a bit based on the nature of your projects. The month might be flexible. Maybe a quarter or half year for some people?
At some point you may need some old cable but you probably end up buying one because you can’t find it.
I simplified a lot of things when I was moving back in. I’m sure I threw out some things I should have kept. For cables specifically I need a better system than going through a large plastic box. Probably some garage reorganization thing.
I solve the problem by not throwing things away unless I don't have room for them. As a result, I have electronic components that are 30+ years old.
My wife's strategy on clothes I had that she didn't like was to hide them in the back of the closet. If I hadn't asked where a particular shirt was in a year, that was her signal that it was fine to throw out. Must have worked because I wasn't aware of it until she told me, years later!
I hang my clothes from left to right, so clothes on the left have been worn recently, things on the far right have not. This makes it super simple to once a year, go through the close and just clear out things on the right of every compartment.
Companies do want to be secure. They try, and they often fail because it's hard.
They hire auditors to find problems and to shift blame. But since they only have 30 days to fix the problems that are found, it's going to see a lot like they only care about shifting the blame. Because at that point, they only care about passing that audit.
Right after that, though, they start caring about security again.
How do I know? 19 years experience going through those audits on the company side. For 11 months of the year, it was clear the boss cared about security. For that 1 month during the 'free retest' period, they only cared about passing that audit.
Leaking customers' data bears no meaningful penalties and has no repercussions while securely storing said data costs money, add frictions and brings nothing but expenses to the bottom line.
Many companies will make a wise business decision to never spend a single cent in the direction of security and safety of data.
I used to work tech support. Those lines are there because they work. In only 9 months, I had a few different people tell me they were pc repair techs and knew what they were doing, and I didn't need to do the basics.
I did them anyhow because the company said so, and I found that more often than not, it fixed the problem.
If I had sent that to second-level support without making sure of it, I'd have been written up.
So yes, they're trained to treat callers like they don't know what they're doing, because they often don't. Even if they claim to.
The best thing you can do is just go along with it quickly and get it over with, even if you've already done it. There's no way around it.
But my problem and main point is that now L2/L3 doesn't seem to exist, or is way way harder to access.
When I did L1, I was trained to permit escalation. Now, it seems people are trained to gaslight people that actually nothing is broken and it's all their head.
It's not as good, but it's good enough.
reply