tz18's comments

this feels like some hellish thing you would be faced with when you first try to use a bus in germany. so in that sense you have succeeded!

Context on the author: he is Internet Policy Counsel at TechFreedom, a think-tank which opposes net neutrality. I feel this is relevant because as the article goes on it feels more and more slanted, like a ship listing into libertarian seas.

Pizza is 3USD a slice in NY?!??!?!?

Honestly, will these people ever stop huffing their own farts? This site is so full of itself sometimes. Are all of you guys really THAT engineer to the degree that you act like it on this site?

Are we really going to celebrate a new marketing term to sell the idea of knowing more than one thing back to engineers?

Like, hey, what if, hey maybe what if it was a good idea for people to know more than just the very narrow domain that we slot them into. Like, they could read books and things, and, have different competencies, and not necessarily approach every problem from the perspective of the STEMMIEST GOONIEST engineer ever. Maybe they could look at the same problem from different perspectives, instead of just steamrolling over all the others in a mad race to be the most engineeringest engineer that ever engineered, the kid that was building radios in his garage, getting stomped on by the kid that was writing linux kernel modules in diapers or some shit, all of us clambering over eachother to engineer harder. And when something goes wrong, the problem was you didn't engineer hard enough-- don't worry, there are ten or twenty brilliant engineers here who will be able to point out your engineering mistakes.

Maybe we should try to understand how we have accepted and profited from a society that increasingly only wants you to know how to do one thing, and that thing is engineering. Maybe even of the amazingly talented engineers on this site-- and I know there are truly many-- it is true that though engineering is what society will currently pay them for, it is not what society needs most of them. Maybe in fact it is paying them mostly to keep their heads down and not think, to work on smart fridges and disposable scooters and giant vacuums that suck up all your data and package it into a CDO. Maybe we all need to read a fucking book once in a while, and maybe that means we need to pay people to write the books so that we have something to read. Here's a shocking idea, maybe some of those writers have multiple competencies too, maybe some of them would actually make amazing engineers-- but actually society needs them to write more than it needs them to engineer. It needs to pay them to write. It needs to pay shitty writers long enough for them to get good as much as it needs to pay shitty engineers. That's what it means for something to be a real profession and not a hobby for dipshits, it means society agrees to pay you without you having to beg. Maybe we don't need comments, maybe we need fucking books. Maybe we don't need headlines, maybe we need stories. And everyone always has a take. Everyone always has a fucking take. Go shove your take. We're living in a fucking take machine here.

Maybe without all this shit, we are plowing forward into a future we don't understand-- towards goals we didn't choose-- because we get paid and hey, we're good at it. We're good engineers. We make thing work. We make thing go fast.

You wanna build something, you wildcard piece of shit, build a way to pay other jobs what they're worth instead of finding new ways to overpay engineers to build fucking Skynet / The Matrix / The Metaverse.

Yes, never. You are assuming that the implementation of all unit test cases are themselves correct (that they would fail if there was any error in the case they cover). In fact unit tests are often wrong. In that context a unit test can't even prove code incorrect, unless we know that the unit test is correct.

IMO to prove that code is correct requires a proof; a unit test can only provide evidence suggestive of correctness.

how about you read the paper?

How many yuan you get for this post?

Squandered isn't harsh at all. The deployment of capital was disproportionate to the size of the profitable business that will result. It could have been better spent elsewhere... or saved.

So that is the sample at the end of Viking North: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CSNCiqbtHLA

this is like coinduction