XCabbage

16 ms·

121.
by XCabbage 7y ago
I honestly can't tell if: a) you've failed to parse the prose you quote and think that it's complaining outright about universities allowing in applicants from "disadvantaged backgrounds", when in fact it is complai
122.
by XCabbage 7y ago
Some abstractions are basically perfect and don't require you to understand the layer beneath them at all. Some have that as their ideal, but are imperfect, and sometimes require you to understand a few details of the layer below. But
123.
by XCabbage 7y ago
Citation?
124.
by XCabbage 7y ago
The press release makes it sound like the entire extent of Assange's involvement in the "conspiracy" was making offhand remarks that the government asserts encouraged Manning: > During the conspiracy, Manning and Assange e
125.
by XCabbage 8y ago
And I would be among those mocking the idea, but that's because I think: 1. The supposed harms of particular lies are frequently overblown. 2. The outright lies that have the most potential to do damage to society are those that get pe
126.
by XCabbage 8y ago
"If [strawman] then [you are wrong because your strawman is stupid]" is not a persuasive argument.
127.
by XCabbage 8y ago
A cynical part of me suspects this idea would get patented nowadays and never take off as a consequence.
128.
by XCabbage 8y ago
But does this happen because Google is ranking those results above ones that matched both words, or because nothing on the web matches both words? I'm often unsure what's going on when I experience this.
129.
by XCabbage 8y ago
> "the CC feature in itself might be a GDPR violation" is a, to use your words, "retarded" idea Well, yes, I agree. > This is classic GDPR fear mongering Well, no. The person who suggested that it's a violatio
130.
by XCabbage 8y ago
Eh? Nobody mentioned mailing lists except you. The guy who brought up GDPR was suggesting that the CC feature in itself might be a GDPR violation. You, on the other hand, are talking about a specific use of CC that people broadly agree is w
131.
by XCabbage 8y ago
If an open standard has features that violate user privacy and don't provide sufficient value in exchange to justify it, it's reasonable to discuss violating or reforming that standard for the sake of privacy. The existence of a s
132.
by XCabbage 8y ago
I'm happy to concede that it's a violation of the ideal of meritocracy, and already did. But so, for that matter, is buying your child a private jet or buying your child health insurance that others can't afford. It's th
133.
by XCabbage 8y ago
It's not "bribing" the school, because what's being paid for is something that the school has the right to give. This comment makes about as much sense to me as saying: > So, to recap, paying someone to steal my car i
134.
by XCabbage 8y ago
While this is technically true, it's irrelevant to the comment of mine you're replying to, which had nothing to do with legality in the first place.
135.
by XCabbage 8y ago
> It doesn't look to me like paying an admissions officer to admit your child is a crime at all. I have not had a chance yet to look properly at the case, but I'd assumed the "fraud" charges are for precisely the act
136.
by XCabbage 8y ago
Why is this any more corrupt than any other exchange of services for money? Yes, there's a system available to the masses that the super-rich are bypassing using their wealth. The same is true of anyone who flies by private jet, or any
137.
by XCabbage 8y ago
Donating a building is a payment to the university . The university then gets to decide to admit your child in return. It may not be meritocratic, but it's not corrupt (except perhaps insofar as by pretending the exchange is a donatio
138.
by XCabbage 8y ago
> w3 is probably correct > It's hardly W3's fault Note that W3Schools is not the W3, and have no official affiliation. > They are dumb because it really makes no difference. ... getting butt hurt because of a "Tip&qu
139.
by XCabbage 8y ago
Three observations: 1. These problems caused actual confusion for real developers doing ordinary web development work. One of the linked questions has hundreds of thousands of views. 2. You suggest I'm being a pedantic dick to people w
140.
by XCabbage 8y ago
Lots of people are commenting to say that W3Schools is now fine. I disagree. On the rare occasion that I end up interacting with them in some way, I find errors. My Stack Overflow post history contains three mentions of W3Schools, all of wh
141.
by XCabbage 8y ago
Yeah, but that approach is annoying and pointless. Typing that is no faster than scrolling past the w3schools results when they appear, so why would I do it? I Google loads of stuff each day. I want to drop w3schools from all my results,
142.
by XCabbage 8y ago
That's arguably true. But if it's what the parent comment meant, then it's illogical for him to deride another programmer as a failure for a post where he admits that working full-stack has led to him not internalising things
143.
by XCabbage 8y ago
When you say > My understanding of how software is built surpasses any language specifics do you mean that sure, you don't understand all the language specifics, but that's unimportant because you understand the high level? Or
144.
by XCabbage 8y ago
Why? Old-school pre-ES6 explicit prototype wrangling was confusing, but what's wrong with using inheritance if you're writing in TypeScript (or, for that matter, a JavaScript version with classes)?
145.
by XCabbage 8y ago
Obnoxious. The other "Falsehoods Programmers Believe" taught me things I didn't know and pointed out mistakes I'd made in the past. This is just a load of patronising progressive preaching which teaches me nothing.
146.
by XCabbage 8y ago
I don't see get why anyone thinks that CSS skills and design/UX skills somehow go together. It seems to me that the skills needed to write CSS have more in common with those needed for programming than for UI design.
147.
by XCabbage 8y ago
I've been a web developer for over 5 years and never once worked somewhere where I'd have any imaginable way of physically accessing the disk of a server. Everything's been cloud-based. I don't know the exact ratios, but
148.
by XCabbage 8y ago
Yeah, I thought that sort of quip might come along. ;) On the one hand, you have a real point. On the other, JavaScript running in my browser has significantly less power to do anything bad to me than arbitrary executable programs running d
149.
by XCabbage 8y ago
I don't get it. The word "whitelist" doesn't appear anywhere on the page, for me. Has the content changed? Or are you sincerely suggesting that nobody should ever load a webpage from a non-trusted domain?
150.
by XCabbage 8y ago
What you're missing is very simple: downloading files from a server need not imply that you trust the server even slightly. That's true whether you're downloading them via HTTPS (e.g. to view this web page) or via SCP. Many o

More ›