smsm42

12 ms·

181.
by smsm42 1y ago
If you don't ever need to know or maintain the code, sure, it's not your code, you don't own it, in fact the code is disposable. For something like POC, where I don't care how it's done, I just want to see if it can
182.
by smsm42 1y ago
It's as much bottleneck for productivity as cars being made of metal are bottleneck for speed. Sure, you can make a paper car. It probably would be faster. Until you collide with something and then you discover why the metal frame was
183.
by smsm42 1y ago
> In the last week i've vibe-code (vibe-engineered?) a typescript project with 230+ commits, 64 typescripts files, with 27k+ lines of code. Too much to actually read. Congratulations, you discovered that generating code is only part
184.
by smsm42 1y ago
> Vibe coding there is a near guarantee the person doesn't know what the code does either. Accepting code into the project when only one person (the author) knows what it does is a very bad idea. That's why reviews exist. Accep
185.
by smsm42 1y ago
The only way such a PR can be reviewed is if it's accompanied with a detailed PRD and tech design documents, and at least half of that LOC count is tests. Even then it requires a lot of interactive work from both sides. I have seen PRs
186.
by smsm42 1y ago
TOS wouldn't be enough but laws wouldn't be enough either. We have thousands of pages of laws, and people violate them all the times, and very often with zero consequences.
187.
by smsm42 1y ago
"I will do anything that will not literally get me into jail" is a pretty low bar. Most decent people try to do better than that - and that's the only reason society still exists, because there's not enough cops to put a
188.
by smsm42 1y ago
DDoS is a very specific type of attack. To be abusive, you don't have to do exactly that - it could be any type of DoS, and in fact it doesn't even have to deny all service - it could just impose excessive costs, for example.
189.
by smsm42 1y ago
"Theft" may be wrong, but "abuse" certainly is not. Human interactions in general, and the web in particular, are built on certain set of conventions and common behaviors. One of them is that most sites are for consuming
190.
by smsm42 1y ago
You are still trying to pretend that accessing HTTP server once and burying it under an avalanche of never-stopping bot crawlers is the same thing? And spam is the same as "sending an email" and should be treated the same? I thoug
191.
by smsm42 1y ago
No, that would only work after getting really high. You know, when somebody asks "why this thing is such and such?" and you answer "why things are at all? Maybe it's all just our imagination, dude! Maybe nothing makes se
192.
by smsm42 1y ago
Experts discover peanut allergies are mostly caused by experts.
193.
by smsm42 1y ago
Yes, it does. You may know what there would be realignment, but you don't know where or how, and may not possess the professional knowledge and resources required to profit from it directly. The known part is general, the unknown part
194.
by smsm42 1y ago
> professional shorts exist You can't both talk about "professional shorts" and use it as an argument against somebody who is not a financial professional. This argument is invalid because not every person who is skeptical
195.
by smsm42 1y ago
True, some of it just random. But some is not. There were reasons why that boom was unsustainable, and they weren't hidden. One can argue nobody knew how and when exactly the break will happen - maybe now, maybe in a week, maybe in 5 y
196.
by smsm42 1y ago
Unfortunately, this does not work. I see no end of banks, financial institutions, let alone random companies, who keep their authentication, for some reason, on different domain than main company, and sometimes they would have initial regis
197.
by smsm42 1y ago
I mean, you can, but not allowed to, legally...
198.
by smsm42 1y ago
Spend well below your earnings, max out tax advantaged savings plans, save aggressively, invest lazily (standard blended portfolio or close to it probably will suffice) and 20 years should be enough to make a decent nest egg.
199.
by smsm42 1y ago
As long as you have a decent capabilities and range, and don't keep all your savings in your employer's stock (either real, or, more stupidly, imaginary "options"), stupidity of your employer will only affect you in the
200.
by smsm42 1y ago
The structure of the derivatives market is not obvious. The idea that home prices will always rise at the present level and you can just pay "less than my last rental" for a new house because handwave should give one a pause. &g
201.
by smsm42 1y ago
> the overwhelming majority of foreclosures in the wake of the '08 crisis were just regular homeowners Yes and no. Yes they were regular homeowners, but they also massively overbid on homes they couldn't afford because it doesn
202.
by smsm42 1y ago
> And, frankly, it's literally the bank's job not to make loans that people will default on too frequently It's not the bank's job though to decide whether it's ok for you to treat the house as a long-term asset
203.
by smsm42 1y ago
I don't doubt that, I just think when throwing around million-sized numbers it is necessary to be aware that these numbers are not describing one case, they describe a lot of different cases. There were a lot of people that were hurt b
204.
by smsm42 1y ago
The police doesn't have the resources now to go after the people who openly offer drugs on the street to any takers now. The chance they'd randomly choose to focus on you because of a random search query is very low. The chance th
205.
by smsm42 1y ago
I don't care as long as the bank losing on it wouldn't be bailed out with my money. Which unfortunately is a common thing now.
206.
by smsm42 1y ago
I lived through dotcom boom and bust, and there had been a lot of craziness, but when the dust settled, we have now a functioning internet economy, and I am able to sit at home in my pajama pants working for an international company that ha
207.
by smsm42 1y ago
> In the subprime crisis 10 million American families lost their homes When you say "lost their homes", do you mean "I owned the house and somehow I now own no house and have no money for it, it just evaporated", or d
208.
by smsm42 1y ago
Don't do stupid things, don't bet everything on a single prospect, don't listen to random people on the internet :)
209.
by smsm42 1y ago
It would not be "damning" - as in you won't be convicted as a drug lord based on that alone - but search histories had been used, many times, in a court of law as evidence supporting intent, knowledge and other details of the
210.
by smsm42 1y ago
The good old "New York Times rule" - https://legal-resources.uslegalforms.com/n/new-york-times-ru...

More ›