d4mi3n

42 ms·

511.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
I don't know of specific companies, was just trying to point you in the right direction. ️
512.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
This is basically PR and propaganda. Any companies you find that specialize in social media will probably have a process, and perhaps software systems, to manage this. These companies are doing what they've always done: influencing pub
513.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
Citizens United totally slipped my mind. Excellent point on the money = speech argument. A thought I had reading your comment was that what money != speech, money _does_ = reach (sock puppets, marketing campaigns, etc). That said, I have no
514.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
I really don't like PR operations like this, but here's a thought experiment: Presumably it's OK to voice one's opinions on social media, but: 1. Is it acceptable for private interests to do the same? 2. At what point do
515.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
Security and privacy. Demand for security folks is white-hot right now, and the need for better security products continues to grow. I've been seeing a lot of companies in adjacent spaces making headway into the security domain as well
516.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
100% agree with you, though I'm skeptical that we'd see an improvement in quality of content if loot boxes and their like become untenable. Aside from getting people hooked, loot boxes tend to feed into a larger aspect of a kind o
517.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
Depends on the org. Highly regulated places like self hosting because keeping data within your own network removes a lot of the legwork for corporate acquisitions processes. If you run a SASS and a regulated business wants to use you, they
518.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
Source Available is pretty sweet if you have a paid product you'd like to do detailed audits on. Especially in regulated environments (finance, medicine, etc). Many enterprises prefer a paid service, as such contracts usually come with
519.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
Fantastic to see more people getting into this space, and even better to be able to inspect the source code! Who's your target demographic here? I work at a place that was considering using Zapier, but couldn't because the securit
520.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
Sure it is, GP is just pointing out that attaining that skill is not a thing of equal opportunity. All one is guaranteed in a meritocracy is that the most skilled person available reaps the benefit. However, a pure meritocracy does not guar
521.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
This was well cited with a lot of fun media references. The author makes a few interesting points on rationale for randomization, calling known unknowns and confounding factors as something one could plan for and avoid. Anybody know of othe
522.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
+1 to this. If 50% is untenable due to large project size or unknown scope, what also works really well is agreeing to big milestones for a project and attaching payment plans/due dates to those milestones. e.g. $5k due upon signing of
523.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
Fun fact: Dogs developed whole extra sets of facial muscles during their domestication: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/06/domestic... This happened in a remarkably short period of time,
524.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
Vendoring as practice isn’t common in some ecosystems (ruby, JavaScript, python, Clojure), but I do see more people using caching proxies and services like JFrog’s to ensure they always have access to particular versions of a dependency. Sa
525.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
Excellent points I had not considered. If as you say, somebody released code saying that it was something they were willing to support, it’s reasonable to expect said author to stand by their statements. That said, this seems like it would
526.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
I worded that poorly. I meant “terms” in the general sense, as some sort of agreement between two parties, but you are absolutely correct.
527.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
While you have a point about behavior, let’s not forget that the library is _free_. Maintaining such projects is often a hard, thankless job. The only obligation any maintainer has is to abide by whatever terms they release their code under
528.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
Oh certainly. Any good security is done in layers. A way to sanitize SQL, however you do it, is one of them.
529.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
There's another big aspect of ORMs a lot of people tend to skip in discussion: Security. Raw SQL can be dangerous, and given enough people and code somebody will eventually make a mistake (as is human) and introduce a vector for a SQL
530.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
Writing code is generally much easier than reading it. Additionally, once you write code, you usually end up needing to change or maintain it. 90% is not uncommon. It's also generally a good sign if you spend less time writing code, be
531.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
Thanks. I found it odd that the author didn’t include a link to the paper.
532.
by d4mi3n 7y ago
I have a friend going through a boot camp, and the financing was eye opening. They are indeed expensive, but consider: what if an applicant does not have the credit history or collateral to get a student loan? This is a pretty common situat
533.
by d4mi3n 8y ago
The law can be whatever it is, but that has no bearing on the nature of an organization outside of incentivizing certain kinds of behavior. A business is an organization that needs to make money to survive. Such an organization will find wa
534.
by d4mi3n 8y ago
Organizations are not people. Characterizing then as such can be very misleading and lead to wildly inaccurate conclusions about why they behave the way they do and what they are likely to do in the future.
535.
by d4mi3n 8y ago
Patio11 has done fantastic writing in this topic that shaped a lot of my own opinions. Worth reading if anybody hasn’t seen it before.
536.
by d4mi3n 8y ago
I can’t agree with this enough. The field of software is growing. It will change. That change may be for the better or worse. But I feel it’s unethical for those of us privileged to be in this field to act as gatekeepers and prevent other
537.
by d4mi3n 8y ago
This is common practice, but it’s playing into a bad power dynamic where the employer is trying to anchor the negotiation to a number. It’s a predatory question, and giving a bullshit answer to a bullshit question is a reasonable response.
538.
by d4mi3n 8y ago
Sorry, didn’t get that when I read your previous post. If that is the case: screw those guys. If you can’t trust a company with _writing an employment contract_, how can you trust any future interaction. If your skills are in demand, move o
539.
by d4mi3n 8y ago
Rule number 1, IMO, never discuss salary. I find listing your salary requirements before starting a process weeds out a lot of silly interviews. If you know your worth and have a goal for your salary, it is the most effective way I know t
540.
by d4mi3n 8y ago
There’s an ongoing debate on “guys” being non-inclusive. I don’t personally buy into it, but that doesn’t make it an invalid position. I generally recommend calling people what they want to be called and exercising common courtesy.

More ›