Is it a positive to have pathogens that cause dengue/malaria in your blood? Yet we still say that someone tested positive for dengue if they have the virus.

Static analysis tools don’t test for all known issues either, no?

It’s all just semantics dude. :)

You could say “A static analysis tool is testing for the for the presence of defects” or “a medical test is testing if your body is free of diseases that it can detect” to change how you’re looking at either of the tests in the previous comment.

At this point, I’m not sure if I should interpret that as “very recyclable” or “barely recyclable”.

Did you just call “family” the “minor part of life”‽ Or am I misunderstanding you?

“it actually depends”

Yes, it depends. But in this scenario we’re not discussing if statements with one or two conditions. We’re exclusively discussing multiple complicated conditions. :)

Thanks!

Duolingo taught me “wilkommen” for “welcome.” Is that used IRL?

I’ve had at least one code reviewer ask me to put all the logic in the if ... line rather than use a variable or two in order to “simplify code by reducing the number of variables.”

At the very least, this article helped me confirm my own bias of “that guy is a moron” and I can send this article to him the next time he reviews my code.

Todoist works great for me. I like the recurring tasks feature which lets me clear up a lot of headspace. “Clean XYZ every 11 days #chore” is all the syntax you need to setup a recurring task that’s categorised under the “chore” category.

Have you tried diluting your cycle with some water or turpentine to reduce its viscosity?

Yup, that’s indeed the format used in some European countries. Canada was surprising though. 🤷‍♂️

I live in Canada and I’ve never seen “1.000,00”. Canada (at least the anglophone part that I live in) follows the usual “1,000.00” format. Why is this library using commas as decimal separators?

In a former workplace, we had a process that was close enough to what’s recommended in the blog, and it worked well. Really well even, there were hardly any ego clashes, everyone would negotiate a consensus and we had “spike” tasks in our sprints so that we can take the time to think about and research complex problems.

And then the fire nation attacked…

A director left the firm and they hired someone from Amazon. He said that we should have a “bias for action”, and got rid of this process, and a lot of other stuff we had going for ourselves using other such catch phrases.

Getting him as a director was probably the worst thing to happen as we were under pressure to deliver stuff quickly all the time, and we’d then have to rework most of the shit because of missed requirements, or tools used not being insufficient for the task at hand etc. He was okay with it though, because “we delivered (shit) quickly”, and “our efficiency went up as indicated by the team velocity charts”.

Pretty much the entire team had left the company in ~1.5 years, and customer satisfaction metrics were in the gutter when I left.

I don’t know if he misunderstood “bias for action” and implemented it badly or if that’s genuinely how people at Amazon operate, but I won’t even think of joining AWS. Fuck that noise.

I’m a “full stack” backend dev - I mainly do backend work, but make minor changes to the frontend, like adding a button to a page that already has 3 other buttons.

I’ve got a couple of friends who didn’t want to do even the occasional front end work and moved to devops. They’d rather deal with k8s and monthly on-call rotations than deal with frontend.

I don’t know who gave you the impression that all backend devs think of front end as “easy”, but it’s definitely not the case, at least in my friend group of n=4. We treat frontend as insane arcane magic and we don’t want anything to do with frontend because we find literally everything else easier.

The trilogy of songs by The Lonely Island ft. Justin Timberlake.

ELI5 of certificates:

The “s” in “https” in urls like “https://wikipedia.com” stands for “Secure”.

When you connect to Wikipedia’s computer to read something, how do you know if the content you get back is what they actually sent and wasn’t altered by your friendly neighborhood hacker?

Wikipedia can “sign” the content before sending it you. They also give you a certificate telling you how they have a particular signature which has been verified by someone else whom you already trust, and how long this particular signature is valid for.

If a hacker tries to alter the document returned by Wikipedia, they wouldn’t be able to sign the document correctly. If they tried to give a certificate with a different signature too, you would catch it because they wouldn’t be able to fake the verification of the “someone you trust” so you’d catch the fake certificate.

Browsers handle all this stuff for us. If it detects something fishy, it’ll just show an error along the lines of “could not verify certificate”. In some cases, it’s genuinely an issue where you/the website is under attack and you may get a virus.

In some other cases though, it’s an issue of the certificate expiring and the guys at Wikipedia not being proactive about getting a new signature and certificate. If you are ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that you’re just dealing with a lazy developer and not a malicious hacker, you can tell your browser to ignore whatever issue it detected and show you the content that was returned by Wikipedia.

Thanks for attending my TEDx talk.

This guy S_20xxxxxxx has a holier than thou comment ranting about the “assholes from reddit being pieces of shit on lemmy”, ironically, on a thread about people being aggressive on lemmy.

A few hours later, he replies to some comments of mine - every single one of them makes him sound more unhinged than the last.

I went through his comment history and his comments swing between these two extremes of being preachy and being unhinged. I decided that blocking him and moving on was better for my sanity than continuing to engage.

There’s no point in engaging with such people, do what’s best for you, and move on. Cheers! :)