16 ms·

> What the fuck is wrong with us? This is simple: we can't just trust each other. When programming started, people were mostly interested in building things,

by smokel 2y ago

> What the fuck is wrong with us? This is simple: we can't just trust each other. When programming started, people were mostly interested in building things, and there was little incentive to spoil other peoples work. Now there is money to be made, either through advertising, or through malpractice. This means that people have to protect their code from others. Program code is obfuscated (compiled and copyright enforced) or stored in a container with a limited interface (cloud). It's not a technical issue, it's a social issue. Applying a social mindset to technical issues (asking your compiler to be your partner, and preparing them a nice dinner) is equally silly as applying a technical mindset to social issues.

godelski 2y ago
> When programming started, people were mostly interested in building things, and there was little incentive to spoil other peoples work. Now there is money to be made, either through advertising, or through malpractice Yeah, I lean towards this too. Signals I use now to determine good software usually are things that look auxiliary because I'm actually looking for things that tell me the dev is passionate and "having fun." Like easter eggs, little things like it looks like they took way too much time to make something unimportant pretty (keeping doing this devs. I love it and it's appreciated. Always makes me smile ^_^). But I am also sympathetic, because yeah I also get tons of issues opened that should have been a google search or are wildly inappropriate. Though I try to determine if these are in good faith because we don't get wizards without noobs, and someone's got to teach them. But it all makes me think we forgot what all of this is about, even "the economy." Money is supposed to be a proxy for increasing quality of life. Not even just on a personal level. I'm happy that people can get rich doing their work and things that they're passionate about but I feel that the way current infrastructures are we're actively discouraging or handcuffing people who are passionate. Or that we try to kill that passion. Managers, let your devs "have fun." Reign them in so that they don't go too deep of rabbit holes and pull too far away, but coding (like any engineering or any science) is (also) an art. When that passion dies, enshitification ensues. For a concrete example: I'm wildly impressed that 99.9 times I'm filling out a forum that includes things like a country or timezone that my country isn't either autoselected or a copy isn't located at the top (not moved! copied!). It really makes me think that better than chasing leet code questions for interviews you ask someone to build a simple thing and what you actually look for is the details and little things that make the experience smoother (or product better). Because it is hard to teach people to about subtly, much harder than teaching them a stack or specific language (and if they care about the little things they'll almost always be quicker to learn those things). Sure, this might take a little more work to interview people and doesn't have a precise answer, but programs don't have precise answers either. And given how long and taxing software interviews are these days I wouldn't be surprised if slowing down actually ends up speeding things up and saving a lot of money.

by smokel 2y ago

godelski 2y ago

> When programming started, people were mostly interested in building things, and there was little incentive to spoil other peoples work. Now there is money to be made, either through advertising, or through malpractice Yeah, I lean towards this too. Signals I use now to determine good software usually are things that look auxiliary because I'm actually looking for things that tell me the dev is passionate and "having fun." Like easter eggs, little things like it looks like they took way too much time to make something unimportant pretty (keeping doing this devs. I love it and it's appreciated. Always makes me smile ^_^). But I am also sympathetic, because yeah I also get tons of issues opened that should have been a google search or are wildly inappropriate. Though I try to determine if these are in good faith because we don't get wizards without noobs, and someone's got to teach them. But it all makes me think we forgot what all of this is about, even "the economy." Money is supposed to be a proxy for increasing quality of life. Not even just on a personal level. I'm happy that people can get rich doing their work and things that they're passionate about but I feel that the way current infrastructures are we're actively discouraging or handcuffing people who are passionate. Or that we try to kill that passion. Managers, let your devs "have fun." Reign them in so that they don't go too deep of rabbit holes and pull too far away, but coding (like any engineering or any science) is (also) an art. When that passion dies, enshitification ensues. For a concrete example: I'm wildly impressed that 99.9 times I'm filling out a forum that includes things like a country or timezone that my country isn't either autoselected or a copy isn't located at the top (not moved! copied!). It really makes me think that better than chasing leet code questions for interviews you ask someone to build a simple thing and what you actually look for is the details and little things that make the experience smoother (or product better). Because it is hard to teach people to about subtly, much harder than teaching them a stack or specific language (and if they care about the little things they'll almost always be quicker to learn those things). Sure, this might take a little more work to interview people and doesn't have a precise answer, but programs don't have precise answers either. And given how long and taxing software interviews are these days I wouldn't be surprised if slowing down actually ends up speeding things up and saving a lot of money.