fragbait65

6 ms·

1.
by fragbait65 4y ago
I've been a technical advisor for several startups, I'd say that overall this advice is wrong. Most startups stay in it way longer than they should. I'm happy that things worked out in your example, but they generally don&#x2
2.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I don't agree. Deceiving and lying are two different things. You are describing somebody being deceptive. You can deceive somebody and still be 100 % truthful.
3.
by fragbait65 5y ago
Is that actually a good example of what you mean? There is no contradiction? The first statement does not say that Joe drove drunk?
4.
by fragbait65 5y ago
Exactly!
5.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I think I'll just write something similar and wrap Apache with a shell scrip, claim that it's a web server written in bash, post it here and see what reaction I get, just for shits and giggles.
6.
by fragbait65 5y ago
It's not exactly the same though. Stolen cars does not have the potential to affect your daily day life as broken software can. I agree that the blame does not lie on the engineers that created the cars or software though. In the end i
7.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I agree, Siberian cold due to changed flows of different currents seems more likely as the end result due to climate change for the Nordics rather than increased temperatures. Increasing temperatures now does not equal increased temperature
8.
by fragbait65 5y ago
My company that I work at actually closes bug reports that has been in "pending customer feedback" for more than 6 months automatically. The customer is free to re-open the issue at a later date if it's still an issue. I pers
9.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I think some incremental improvements could be done for C, question is if it's worth the time? Maybe it's better to just use a better tool for new code bases?
10.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I agree. The difference is that engineering over all is mature enough that you can make incremental changes over time and it still does not invalidate what you did previously. If you built a bridge 10 years ago its probably safe enough to l
11.
by fragbait65 5y ago
Well, I agree that you can wish that the tool was better designed, that's a whole different thing though. What I meant to say, in a rather roundabout way to be fair, is that the problem is both the language and the programmers. C is a
12.
by fragbait65 5y ago
Well, I do think a programming language is a tool and it is kind of wrong to blame the tool for the mistakes made by the one wielding it. The problem with C is that it's a tool where you have no safety and I don't think there&#x27
13.
by fragbait65 5y ago
Sounds a bit weird? Who signs an NDA at a job interview?
14.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I agree, especially since a portion of the "new" movies are regurgitation of old classics anyway and more often than not weaker than the original movies.
15.
by fragbait65 5y ago
Well, I can agree with that! Chances are that your code base will be untestable, at least for unit testing, if unit testing where not considered at all when writing it.
16.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I used to do TDD, I found that it didn't work that well for me. I still think that the code base you work on dictates how you should be testing. It also dictates which testing strategy I use. I test for different things when writing C
17.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I think it's a failure to ever believe that unit tests provide any correctness proof. The only thing you achieve with unit tests is to prove that you are still bug for bug compatible when changing your code. I think experience is neede
18.
by fragbait65 5y ago
Yes, I agree. The question is what the system need to change into? I'm not an expert, but it seems that all known political and/or economic systems fail in the face of greed and selfishness. Or maybe greed is the effect of a faile
19.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I'd say wealth and education, but in most counties wealth and education go hand in hand, so I agree with what you say.
20.
by fragbait65 5y ago
The problem is that we have elected leaders that only care about being in power. They will happily watch the world burn unless a majority of the voters want them to move. Sadly I don't think most people are ready to make the necessary
21.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I mostly agree with what you say, but I don't think any other economic/political system would do better than capitalism. The problem isn't really with which system you use, no known political/economic system can handle g
22.
by fragbait65 5y ago
Problem with that, especially in the US I think, is that the majority of people will not like what you are doing. The only way to enact change is to get the majority of people on your side. What you suggest will only antagonize people thoug
23.
by fragbait65 5y ago
Current news suggest that they are upping the threshold to 3 children trying to stimulate population growth due to needing to increase their available work force in the future. These measures are not as extreme as the last time they stimula
24.
by fragbait65 5y ago
You are probably correct. I didn't really mean to suggest population control, even though I wrote just that. The problem as I see it is that everybody tries to approach the problem as if it will be solvable by technology. The only way
25.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I agree with everything you say. It's actually not a science/technology problem. The problem is human nature, and that's not solvable with technology. If it was, then everything would be rather simple...
26.
by fragbait65 5y ago
That's not my point. My point is that there's no need for population control. The problem will eventually solve itself. I think humanity is doomed as long as there are egotistical and greedy people and there's nothing you or
27.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I agree with what you say. I didn't mean to say that the the population growing is the actual problem. I mean to say that lack of resources is the problem. (Too lazy to create a link) https://www.theworldcounts.com/cha
28.
by fragbait65 5y ago
Honestly, why bother? The earth isn't dying, the earth will be fine, it will recover over time, humanity on the other hand needs to be reduced. If it isn't climate change, an epidemic or something else, then it will be war over re
29.
by fragbait65 5y ago
I personally wouldn't, but everybody has to decide for themselves. I at least know a few companies that would avoid hiring people who criticize old employers, afraid they will be next. I mean, most companies have at least some "sk
30.
by fragbait65 5y ago
The reason they don't want to do anything other than security updates, and sometimes not even that, is because they need consistency across calculations over time. This might be a poor example, but lets say an error was found in a comp

More ›