cf499

4 ms·

1.
by cf499 5y ago
"Maybe if the infrastructure people were involved in development discussion earlier, they'd be able to raise their hands and say: wait a minute, you're going to blow up our logs." "Maybe if you invited the operation
2.
by cf499 5y ago
"programmers on six-figure salaries" probably wrote the systems that coordinate and optimise the low-paid tasks you mention.
3.
by cf499 5y ago
Maybe they're telling you to run.
4.
by cf499 5y ago
"(...) but there are safeguards against that." Hah! Nice one :D
5.
by cf499 5y ago
"It really vindicates everything Snowden has said on the topic." Did any of his statements really need vindication though? Have we not known about this forever? (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON ) I
6.
by cf499 5y ago
"Gen Z and Millennials are two of the least religious generations ever in the US, with Gen Z being roughly 50% irreligious." Thank God!
7.
by cf499 5y ago
"He probably has earned the right to be condescending as much as say Linus has." It's not about rights, it's about desires and personal insecurities. People who derive pleasure from condescension are just telling you tha
8.
by cf499 5y ago
My point was that there is no list that anyone can make that lets you sidestep the unpleasant fact that you have to kill something to eat (each of your 5 points involve taking the life of something else. Even eating roadkill implies killing
9.
by cf499 5y ago
The only morally sound answer to that question is "anything or nothing" because any other choice implies that you have to justify why one organism is more worthy of life than another. Am I wrong or just not fun at parties? :D
10.
by cf499 5y ago
Both sides of this "readability vs. performance" debate can be argued ad absurdum but that's not my intention. All I know is that I try to conserve resources no matter what level of the stack I'm working on and those gen
11.
by cf499 5y ago
Sure, it makes sense if you find something like `len_x` or `x_count` significantly less readable than `len(x)` and if you don't have to worry about resources. Can't say I've been there though. I did a quick test of this `reve
12.
by cf499 5y ago
I think the difference is that redundant re-calculation is a code smell in any language, at all times, whereas the float/int division issue requires knowledge of Python 2/3 syntax quirks.
13.
by cf499 5y ago
> That’s actually roughly len(arr) times, not three, since two of the calls are inside the loop. You're right! I noticed it a few minutes ago and changed the wording accordingly. Thanks for pointing out how shockingly bad that alg
14.
by cf499 5y ago
> Isn't "Code you don't understand" the definition of AI/ML? We don't need to understand the process to evaluate the output in this case. Bad code is bad code no matter who/what wrote it.
15.
by cf499 5y ago
> The author makes no comment on how hideously bad it is, which makes me suspect he didn’t notice, which… yeah, shows the problems of the whole thing. The author's comments on that "reverse" function are equally bad - h
16.
by cf499 5y ago
Thanks for letting me know that I'm not alone! :D I handle QR codes by taking a picture and decoding on the command line using zbarimg. If the decoded output is a URL and looks safe I might visit the site. No way I'm letting an in
17.
by cf499 5y ago
# secret_key = random.randrange(1, bitcoin_gen.n) # this is how you _would_ do it I know the article is mainly for learning purposes but someone should point out that the `random` module in python is not meant for cryptography. Plea