Privacy846

14 ms·

61.
by Privacy846 6y ago
That “Cli Guideline” seems to be written by people who are enarmored with terrible shells like Bash.
62.
by Privacy846 6y ago
Corporations are not people, however.
63.
by Privacy846 6y ago
I have used `grep -r` a ton on our codebase and purpose-specific tools like “find usages” are always more to the point while `grep -r` can easily be misleading. Also you can’t just tend toward greppable names (whatever that means) if you sh
64.
by Privacy846 6y ago
> I think the point is that with [Unix] you aren’t just stuck with what some product manager at JetBrains thought was a cool feature. But you see that’s exactly what you are, because you can’t refactor Java code with what you call “Unix
65.
by Privacy846 6y ago
Unix isn’t integrated enough. You can’t go very far with just throwing strings around (or bytes). You can’t safely refactor, say, Java code like you can do in Intellij. Maybe you can piece something together manually that does the same th
66.
by Privacy846 6y ago
But enough about you. There are a lot of places where people aren’t exposed to English-spoken media even if they might consume American media (dubbing in particular).
67.
by Privacy846 6y ago
> Are there people who would be interested in how Python works at the C level but can't read English easily? They said that there might be because they know people who are interested in the subject but don’t speak English. So I don
68.
by Privacy846 6y ago
If most of programming is code maintenance, and you think of that as an anti-passion activity, your “passion for programming”—you didn’t state that explicitly, but let’s be real about the implicit comparison you’re drawing here—may be a mir
69.
by Privacy846 6y ago
Thank you. The article doesn’t unpack the initialism, and the author just links to a Rust Playpen (or whatever) site which supposedly uses this three-word thing.
70.
by Privacy846 6y ago
What you talk about in your first paragraph is irrelevant. I am talking about the actual value the employees bring through their value, not what price they managed to negotiate for their labor on the market. If a restaurant is operated by
71.
by Privacy846 6y ago
What I see here in the comments are (in part) people that are concerned that the business model is just based on exploiting regulatory loopholes. Is the concern for people’s living safety (as well as other things) a crabs-in-a-bucket “fall
72.
by Privacy846 6y ago
In the article I a see a success story for the people behind the company. The results (valuation and whatever) speak for themselves and how they got there is irrelevant if the only question is whether the company is successful in dollars a
73.
by Privacy846 6y ago
Lerner? Is his name also a joke?
74.
by Privacy846 6y ago
If you think authority and hierarchy is the way to go then there’s nothing wrong with proprietary software (both the product and how it is produced).
75.
by Privacy846 6y ago
It’s interesting that the biggest _diss_ here seems to be that they are “not that bright”, not the implication that they are doing something blameworthy.
76.
by Privacy846 6y ago
> You also use this word "democratic" in a way that does not mean "rule by the majority". I’ll take the bait. “Democratic legal system” is, according to you, an oxymoron because of the “rule by the majority” part? A
77.
by Privacy846 6y ago
Notice how these two things are divided based on different criteria: one is about aspiration/stated intent (“making things people want”) while the other just plainly describes a person’s role in a wider context. Sounds like a setup fo
78.
by Privacy846 6y ago
It is, however, relevant to my claim—which you took such offense to—that it is virtually impossible to become a self-made billionaire. The Economist author seems to agree that capitalist class struggle will help the would-be billionaire, n
79.
by Privacy846 6y ago
Here’s a recent quote from the Marxist rag The Economist: > One reason for the measure’s current strength is that the balance of power seems to have moved in favour of capital, and against labour, in recent decades. The decline of trade
80.
by Privacy846 6y ago
> Ownership capped at 1 billion, you get a sticker saying "I won capitalism" and all further growth and income goes to the government for social programs. You get a new ticker that estimates lives saved and people homes/fe
81.
by Privacy846 6y ago
I don’t know who Graham is talking about—“politicians”?—but this is a very famous claim, or corollary, from Marx: capitalists exploit workers. Why? Because of the labor theory of value. (1) All value is created from labor. (2) Capitalist
82.
by Privacy846 6y ago
> Therefore, privacy-preserving products will always lag behind their less private counterparts in productivity gains afforded to their users. “Always” is a very absolute word. Isn’t it absurd that you (presumably, based on this conclus