Draiken

35 ms·

451.
by Draiken 3y ago
> if a Market creates externalities, then it is time to consider, argue over, and politically implement alternatives. Until you can't, because gigantic corporations are stronger than states and can purchase even more power through c
452.
by Draiken 3y ago
So because a few forms need validations you turn your whole application into a JS hellhole? That's the crux of the issue. It's not that JS isn't needed and small pieces of interactivity aren't nice. But we chose to turn
453.
by Draiken 3y ago
Not OP but I have not. As an ignorant, I have a burning question (for real, not being facetious): isn't it bullshit? Judging by the outcomes of the field and the absurd world we live in today with insane boom/bust cycles every few
454.
by Draiken 3y ago
Citation needed. 99% of apps are basic CRUD apps. Aside from a few interactive pages - which you could even write with React - there's zero need for this bloat. No, your "application" is not Google Docs, Spotify, etc. It&#x27
455.
by Draiken 3y ago
I agreed with most of your comment but this almost triggered me: > React and Next with RSC aren't a bad choice. Web development just isn't as simplistic as people on HN seem to think it is. Yes it fucking is. I've been doi
456.
by Draiken 3y ago
The reality is that it's not exactly "in the middle" either. It's the simple fact that we must really think and carefully consider these decisions and processes. But the vast majority of people don't want to think.
457.
by Draiken 3y ago
As a complete noob at actually running these models, what kind of hardware are we talking here? Couldn't pick that up from the README. I absolutely love the idea of using one of these models without having to upload my source code to a
458.
by Draiken 3y ago
I agree. This will ultimately become another way to extract more value straight into the pockets of the owners. Unfortunately, I don't believe there's a way to stop (or even slow down) this train. We can't defeat it, so the o
459.
by Draiken 3y ago
If you're at the start of a company writing an MVP, then you're spot on. If the code isn't being written for a startup in the early stages, this doesn't make sense. Writing bad code that just "gets it done" is
460.
by Draiken 3y ago
Funny that Bolsonaro did the exact same thing with his claims about the voting process, but this was not the reaction from his minions. Suddenly you had people that can't do basic math claiming they know the election system is rigged b
461.
by Draiken 3y ago
That's what POROs are there for. I truly don't want a faux type system only to then keep using hashes for everything...
462.
by Draiken 3y ago
Hash is so powerful in Ruby that people often overuse them. One of the most common issues I found on Ruby code-bases is to not create classes to represent their domain and simply use hashes everywhere. The downside is that a hash has no sha
463.
by Draiken 3y ago
That's a big mischaracterization of what I wrote. No, it's not a binary choice between professional or not professional. This kind of simplification is exactly the type of harm the original article reinforces. If you wanna tout ar
464.
by Draiken 3y ago
Every time I read a variation of the "for the benefit of the org" phrase I cannot help but laugh at the absurdity of it. Do I own the org? If I produce 5x more, do I get rewarded 5x more? What about the other way around: will the
465.
by Draiken 3y ago
Yes these things happen, but in my experience it's about incentives set by the environment. When short term gains outweigh long term gains, short sighted decisions will be favored. When nobody really cares about quality, people ship sl
466.
by Draiken 3y ago
This article is patronizing and tries to simplify the complexities of managing people by putting them into buckets and listing recipes. For me, this type of view only causes more harm than good. Instead of actually sitting down with the &qu
467.
by Draiken 3y ago
> Most people (across any discipline) have very little regard for the "interests" of the organization that they're working for. Not because of incompetence or malice or organizational dysfunction but because most people ju
468.
by Draiken 3y ago
IDK man, irrelevant for who? It's definitely relevant to me. I would never work at Amazon because of these practices, even if they probably don't extend to developers (at least at the same scale). Maybe it's not relevant for
469.
by Draiken 3y ago
Not directly, only by proxy. Profit is king. At Amazon scales, you weigh in how much money you'll save by breaking laws and eventually getting a slap on the wrist fine versus all other alternatives. Unsurprisingly it's often much
470.
by Draiken 3y ago
Yeah it makes sense they don't want unions, but that's not the point of it. Anti-union behavior is still mostly illegal, isn't it? There's a difference between expecting companies to help unions vs actively engage in sha
471.
by Draiken 3y ago
Exactly. And somehow people fail to see a difference between human needs and the needs of a profit seeking machine. Without unions individuals basically NEVER have bargaining power. And of course it's not like you can choose to not wor
472.
by Draiken 3y ago
That's such a bad analogy. Unions are only really brought up when people are being mistreated, underpaid, overworked, etc. People don't unionize when their needs are met (even if they should). Your analogy doesn't work even i
473.
by Draiken 3y ago
Exactly. And MacBook users don't choose MacOS either. For many non tech savvy users if you give them a Linux laptop with any modern DE, they can't tell the difference. But it seems these filters are almost always cherry picked aga
474.
by Draiken 3y ago
> Humans have worked for themselves, for no master, since before we became Homo Sapiens. Sure, humans worked for themselves, but that was not what ultimately got us here. Humans only survived and thrived by working together. Homo Sapiens
475.
by Draiken 3y ago
I hard disagree here. That's what capitalism wants us to evolve into: individual enterprises. But no, there's nothing inherent in the universe or human nature that determines individualism as the true way of working. You don'
476.
by Draiken 3y ago
You keep repeating this as if it was actually an easy feat. No, aside from already famous established actors you won't just "negotiate a way better perfect contract upfront". This is where the capital power imbalance cannot b
477.
by Draiken 3y ago
> People who have a higher level of understanding- people who can intelligently talk about the product I agree with you here, those are valuable. But IME those are usually not the ones in positions of power. I've met passionate deve
478.
by Draiken 3y ago
I never understood this. If you can get away with "pretending to work" then either you have a bullshit job or everyone is in this bullshit rodeo together. If I work with someone (supervising or not) I know if they are working or s
479.
by Draiken 3y ago
Could be, but how is that macho in any way? If anything, it's sound advice. Most of my early day colleagues copy/pasted everything from StackOverflow without understanding any of it, causing huge issues down the line. They were th
480.
by Draiken 3y ago
> that macho programmer Why do people keep making value judgements about people that built tools they trust like they should be ashamed or something like that? Parent simply explained his process and why he uses vim like that and why he

More ›