In praise of being paid to write unnecessary tests that break within hours after writing them and then spending hours incrementally fixing these tests as they break with every. fucking. commit
My first knee-jerk reaction to your post was the same as the people who downvoted you: Here's another person incorrectly implementing a process, and then blaming the process when it fails.
But, real talk: Automated testing is borderline impossible without buy-in from the developers maintaining the code under test.
You get developers changing function signatures so tests no longer compile. You get changes to function invariants that invalidate the tests. You get UI changes that break tests that look for component placement, or that search for certain strings in the UI.
If your developers insist on changing these things (or are forced to change these things by constantly-shifting project requirements) without updating the tests, then you are just treading water.
In that case, you probably are better off with manual tests.
Dunning and Kruger explained how people drastically overestimate their value. The author won't be earning what he thinks he deserves, isn't working on projects he thinks he deserves, and doesn't get the promotions he thinks he deserves wherever he goes. His reality may never change for him and that's his cross to carry.
Executives at a French company couldn't treat people as resources and fire at will because France has employee protection laws (sounds good but only in theory). So, the executives made employees miserable, intending to push them to quit. Instead, employees killed themselves. You want to fire people but you can't, so what do you do? Make them not want to be there anymore.
There is a case to be made that these employees would have killed themselves if they were fired. This is an important distinction because it's the loss of employment, not harassment, that lead to suicide.
It's crazy to think that there are people here who will read this and think that with this given, firing should be illegal and executives charged for manslaughter. You are thinking dangerously and need to study history. Or, you are French and there is no difference.
It's crazy to to think that people are still suggesting people to "study history", as though history is a homogeneous mass that can even be studied as a whole.
It's crazy to think that history is uniformly in favor of the executive class. That somehow the brutality of the elites can be justified by their understanding of history. That they can't be deferred to some broader concept of morality because they have history on their side. This argument is the same as the one made by Francis Fukuyama in his book The End of History and the Last Man and it is fundamentally flawed in the same way.
Never have violence, inequality, exclusion, famine, and thus economic oppression affected as many human beings in the history of the earth and of humanity. Instead of singing the advent of the ideal of liberal democracy and of the capitalist market in the euphoria of the end of history. Let us never neglect this obvious, macroscopic fact, made up of innumerable, singular sites of suffering: no degree of progress allows one to ignore that never before, in absolute figures, have so many men, women and children been subjugated, starved or exterminated on the earth.
The proportion dosen't seem as morally relevant (though it is a factor) as the sheer number (you can figure it as a trolley problem; the train running over 10k out of 100k is arguably worse than running over 5 out of 10) - and arguably, inequality, exploitation and domination have more to do with relative wealth than absolute wealth. Although the lives of a great many have undeniably improved, that has nothing to do with what social scientists and philosophers of economics mean by inequality, exploitation and domination - which usually focuses on the share of productive capacity by members of society. All the "big names" like Sen and Roemer have those issues on the radar. You can figure the problems of the system in terms of domination[0], exploiters dominating[1], extraction of surplus-value[2], or unequal exchange of labour[3][4].
If it's the sheer number you care about, not the proportion, then the problem is clear: Human reproduction. Eliminate that, and the sheer number of incidents of oppression and suffering will go down.
You say this as if a government with the capacity would save the day? The government already has the capacity to solve problems but this is the best that it can achieve. This is it. It's not being held back because it only had a trillion dollar budget to work with.
It chooses not to. It chose to waste the trillion dollars in Iraq; it chooses not to rationally investigate its options and invest in those most likely to have good outcomes.
As to why it chooses to do that, it looks like the crime in Chicago isn't an issue that affects marginal voters. Or that crime is endemic all the way up in Illinois; four of the last eight governors have been jailed for corruption, and that appears to be a cross-party problem.
Help my ignorance here, but why is the first response seem to go federally? Corruption seems to be a huge issue for Chicago, and the city is mostly run by one side for a while so why can’t they get anything done?
Hardly the first response, since it's been a mess for years, but it follows naturally from your second sentence: it's clear that the problem has festered for a long time and the local system is incapable of fixing it. If the corruption can't be attacked from the inside, perhaps outsiders will be able to break it?
It took Federal prosecution to get Al Capone, after all.
Kansas was running on fumes for a long time by not taxing. Now, this? One group of idealists were replaced with another with no more sensibility than their counterparts.
You're mistaking Kansas City, MO with Kansas City, KS. Kansas (the state) was running on fumes for a long time. Kansas (the state) also has nothing to do with this.
These are literally the first three words of the article:
"Kansas City, Missouri"
These are people who are competing with unionized drivers at UPS. Why feel any compassion towards them about their work conditions? They are only serving their own interests.
I'm unclear whether you're OK with spending other people's money but not your own. The fund supporting this initiative accepts donations. Have you donated? Have you volunteered? No, you haven't and you won't.
Why do you say that? I have supported educational efforts in prison, but not this specific one. I have personally hired at least 3 people who have been in prison.
Rust doesn't seem to lend any advantages for this kind of tool, but I'm sure it took weeks to write (months?) rather than just a couple of hours. What can this do that bash scripts couldn't? This migration tool uses plain sql files. I'm not hating but questioning the use of a complicated language to do no more than what native shell scripts can, with ease.
Just based on a quick skim of the readme, it looks to me like it supports, but does not require sql files. Presumably this tool works better for someone who already has a Rust application and wants to write Rust and not deal with SQL directly if possible.
