From my experience in the industry, if the average backend dev went to work in that industry, the average level of competence would go up (compare the average salary, for one thing). The processes are all about making it hard to fuck up really badly, they're very much not going to weed out 'careless' devs, just limit the damage they can do.
I don't think "careless" is a permanent, intrinsic attribute of a developer. It's something they learn to be, and it can be unlearned.
We respond to incentives. If a developer's only incentive is "we reward shipping as fast as possible" then they will carelessly ship slop as fast as they can type it. If that incentive is removed, they can learn a better way...
Seven years later, and the sort of fan out/in behavior proposed here is implemented all the time where necessary but not considered a concurrency primitive. I think I remain more interested in the erlang/elixir process approach to concurrency. Practically that seems so much more powerful than anything else available today.
The CCP strictly controls knowledge and information access within China through rigorous censorship. It would be surprising if Chinese companies were allowed to just make their advancements open source without review, if those advancements would have a meaningful impact on the state of technology.
It is strange and inappropriate to call that observation racist.
I don't think it's intentional racism, but a lot of what many western folks think of China come from propaganda. China has visa-free policy for many countries now. Go check it out in person.
To be clear, believing propaganda generally is also not racist, unless that propaganda is specifically racist. And even if you believe censorship and authoritarian oversight of companies by the CCP is western propaganda, it is still not racist.
I think their only big gap is the inability to alias general project non-python scripts in uv. This forces you to use something like a justfile or similar and it would be much more ergonomic to just keep it all in uv.
"A common or longstanding belief, custom, or catchphrase associated with a particular group, especially one with little current meaning or truth." (Wiktionary).
If you mean to restrict it to the Biblical usage of pronunciation, it generalized past that centuries ago.
Please don't be a jerk on HN, no matter how limited someone's English is or you feel it is. Posts like this only make things worse, whether you're right or not.
HN doesn’t really distinguish between “punching down” and “punching up”, and prefers to avoid “punching” at all.
The guiding principle to keep top of mind is “intellectual curiosity”. There’s a place for an intellectually curious discussion about the history and present day meaning of the word “shibboleth”, and the way you commented brings that to a screeching halt. And even if someone else seems to be acting like a bit of a jerk in the comments, it doesn’t make it OK to do it too.
But as you say, you’ll try to do better which is great.
This topic seems relevant to HN, but it leaves me disappointed in the civility of commenters.
In my opinion, this is the biggest cost of the current political climate.
I know a lot of people on both sides of the political aisle, and none of them are more sympathetic to an opposing viewpoint after having been insulted.
Why would this follow? There are many more ants and yet I can use a single word to refer to them, and certainly the biology text that defines them contains fewer words than there are ants.
I see. It still does not make sense to me that there are necessarily undefinable numbers. That is, for any given number x there is not an English sentence y that defines the number. That sentence may need to be arbitrarily long, but so what? English has more flexibility than math in defining things, maybe that is the disconnect. It seems to me that insofar English can define any number, it can define all of them.
It feels to me like this is trying to draw an equivalence between language and mathematics yet disallowing the inherent ambiguity of language. At that point, the comparison is just silly.
reply