therefore had no journalistic obligations (I.e. they could say whatever they wanted).

There is literally no such thing in the eyes of the law. They could say whatever they want whenever they want.

journalism has legal protections and responsibilities that are upheld/enforced in courts.

No. It does not. The first amendment does not say "if you are a legally recognized journalist". It applies to everybody.

Fox "News" is not a news channel. They actually define themselves as "entertainment" so you can't call them out for their lies in court.

This is the weirdest thing liberals believe. There is no such thing as "defining yourself as news or entertainment." There is no legal definition of "news organization".

The lawsuit you're going to reference said that Carlson was "opining" rather than stating "facts" which has a legal definition. Legal definitions don't often match with common usage.

And you can "call anyone out" for lying whether they're a news organization or not.

"My situation is nuanced and complicated. Other people's situations are simple and straightforward."

They believed the caricature "bad people" were going to be the ones targeted. She wasn't a "bad person" she just stayed a little longer while trying to get her green card....

We feel totally blindsided

😑

Are we going to see how advanced shopping centers are in Iran? 🤣

the Guadalupe River had risen about 26 feet in 45 minutes.

Goddamn...

Many (most?) databases these days support some sort of full text search.

If a function has 300 lines without a lot of supporting documentation then I doubt that it is “clear, readable and concise” anyway.

Code - not function. Files often have multiple functions in them. If you can't read and understand code - I don't want you on my team.

I have never found it hard at all to skip past comments that are not relevant because my code editor helpfully colors them differently from the rest of the code, making it easy. Does your editor not do the same?

If it's something people will simply skip over then it's not useful. Don't pollute code with tons of unnecessary comments that you think will be useful for some "perceived future". They just add to your maintenance work.

Write your code to be understandable and document the architecture/design separately.

It depends on what you are doing. If you are implementing relatively simple logic like a REST API handler, then it is probably overkill. If you are implementing a relatively advanced algorithm, then having a running narrative of what is going can be extremely helpful.

Agree - most code is pretty straight forward. Save the comments for where it's needed.

I think at some point you have to ask yourself "if killing 10s of thousands of innocent people is necessary to achieve my goal... does that make me the 'baddie'?"

You want to turn my 300 lines of clear, readable and concise logic into 1,000 lines of English paragraphs that break up the functions of my code into yet smaller pieces of code devoid of context? Now I have to dig through that book, ignoring all the shit I've read hundreds of times because it doesn't compile into anything, just to debug an off-by-1 error in a loop buried in a paragraph explaining the original developers diatribe on why we're looping over that range? Fuck. No.

This is the sort of academic crap that sounds good but in practice is just terrible for anything other than small projects that are intended specifically to teach.

This is something I've said for a very long time. Everytime some RAD or "low code" tool claims that it will make developers obsolete because "you won't need to write code"! I know that I'm going to need to help some BA use that tool and that there will be a tiny little box hidden in that tool somewhere which let's me write code to work around its limitations.

LLMs are useful to a developer as a cordless drill is to an engineer.

Software development is about understanding logic, data structures, and how to solve business problems with computers. A language is simply what we use to do that.

That sounds so painful. Not surprising it never caught on.

In the '80s.. You think they should continue their policies from 40 years ago?

When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

I look forward to reading your zine.

Hey, Jackass, then I'm not talking about you am I? 🙄

So, containers do not get you reproducibility.

You absolutely do. If you build a container and publish it you will pull down that exact thing every time. How is that not "reproducibility"?

You no what though? Scratch that - who gives a fuck? Bit-for-bit reproducibility takes far more effort than it's worth anyway. Even NixOS isn't completely reproducible. It's a false goal.

For dev environments, repeatable is okay.

It's well more than good enough you mean.

If you want actually reproducible binaries that you can ship, Nix is better fit for that purpose.

Nobody really needs that.

So "not voting" must surely be the answer.

I’d rather vote 3rd party than for a Corprocrat.

Many I remember my late teens when I thought this was sooo edgy...

 undefined

    
docker build . -t docker.company.com/build-env:1.0 && docker push docker.company.com/build-env:1.0


  

But for like 99% of development teams "repeatable" is Good Enough(tm).