Suppose we all did read the docs. How possible is it with the complexity of a modern system to really take literally everything in account, and understand the implications oof everything to keep your system safe? It’s great that it’s documented, but if security isn’t the default option, it will lead to issues, and everything has become so complex, that imo correctly managing everything is literally impossible… This is a systemic issue, not a user issue.

The “optimized for features” bothered me a bit of concept.

I think i now narrowed it down on how i see it: It’s optimized for predictability, and lack of need of really skilled people. Real optimization requires real skill, and is inherently unpredictable. You can aim high, but how achievable it is, isn’t always clear up front. But the current way, makes software engineering more predictable, and hiring also, you just need average programmers who can more or less use frameworks the way they’re intended, and that’s enough.

It’s just planning for what you know is predictable, and you can actually promise to your customers. And it does kind of suck, but from an economic/business sense, i can kind of understand it…

Can you then give me your definition of “lazyness” The dictionary just gives me “the quality of being unwilling to work or use energy; idleness.”

And i don’t see it anywhere in this situation. They’re asked to do a job a certain way (or for management, to make sure it happens in a certain way), and they do that to the best of their ability.

Could they do it better from an performance/software engineering standpoint if they had infinite time/budget? for sure. But that’s not the world we live in.

Wouldn’t he only be lazy if he’s not doing anything else more productive instead?

He gets payed to do a specific job, and does it the best way possible given the constraints. I don’t see how you find lazyness in that.

The customer simply isn’t willing to pay the extra time for it to be optimized, and he ain’t doing it for free.

I don’t know which job you do, but do you spend a lot of voluntary overtime just to do things the customer isn’t even asking or paying for just because you think it’s better?

It’s not just software development, it’s everywhere. Devices are cheap, people are expensive. So it’s not lazy, he’s being asked to put his expensive time into efforts the customer actually wants to pay for. If having him optimize the code further costs way more than buying a better computer, it doesn’t make sense economically for him to waste his time on that.

Is that yet another example of how the economy has strange incentives? For sure, but that doesn’t make him lazy.

Such assholes of course also exist, but here on the local farmers market, the one selling vegetables indicates what is stuff he grew himself, vs things he bought from elsewhere. So if you want to buy things from the actual farmer standing there, you’re perfectly capable of doing so (alas, just selling those things isn’t really an option. Not enough people come to such markets if they can’t find pretty much every vegetable they want…)

And regarding the price in this meme, that’s also a complex story. Can indeed be inefficiencies of smaller scale distribution of the same stuff. But on the other hand there is organic and “organic” farming. There is always a large push by the large scale organic farmers to keep the requirements of being organic as low as possible. So yeah, there is a big difference between large scale farms that just make the bare minimum requirements for being called organic, vs smaller scale farms that actually try to make their farm respect nature (which is kind of the point of being an organic farmer).

And in the end, it’s like all things in life, want to do it properly? Then spend time on actually learning who’s who, what’s what, if there is a farmers market, if they’re serious, i’m sure you can visit their farms. You can learn about the methods they use, and the impact of those methods, and then compare it to other methods of production, and see if it’s worth it for you, and see if the quality difference is worth it.

Sadly enough, the same is applicable for regular programs…

If it were only this hard for bad stuff, you might have a point, but this also being an issue for good stuff is why linux is such a PITA to use…

I don’t think it has much to do with how “complex or not” it is, but rather how common it is.

It can completely fail on very simple things that are just a bit obscure, so it has too little training data.

And it can do very complex things if there’s enough training data on those things.

Is it worthless to say “(the current iteration of) AI won’t be a huge revolution”. For sure, it might be, the next decade will determine that.

Is it worhtless to say that many companies are throwing massive amounts of money at it, and taking huge risks on it, while it clearly won’t deliver for them? I would say no, that is useful.

And in the end, that’s what this complaint seems like for me. The issue isn’t “AI might be the next big thing”, but “We need to do everything with AI right now”, and then in a couple of years when they see how bad the results are, and how it negatively impacted them, noone will have seen it coming…

What else would you want to use something like teams for??

I love docker, it of course comes with some inefficiencies, but let’s be real, getting an app to run on every possible environment with any possible other app or configuration or… that could interfere with yours in some way is hell.

In an ideal world, something like docker is indeed not needed, but the past decades have proven beyond a doubt that alas, we don’t live in this utopia. So something like docker that just sets up a private environment for the app so that nothing else can interfere with it… why not? Anything i’ve got running on docker is just so stable. I never have to worry that any change i do might affect those apps. Updating them is automated, …

Not wasting my and the developers time in exchange for a bit of computer resources, sounds like a good deal. If we find a better way for apps to be able to run on any environment, that would of course be even better, but we haven’t, so docker it is :).

None actually happened, and they just wanted to track which features were actually used to be able to see how/where to focus their efforts in audacity.

It just joined the musescore project, great open source music notation software. For funding the only commercial thing they offer is a site where you can upload & download scores, with the paying part also paying licensining fees for copyrighted music. Imo all looks very legit. I was already familiar with musescore before this drama, and watched some of tantacrul (head of the musescore project, and now also audacity i guess). He’s a very down to earth guy that has quite some insightful videos on the musescore development and figuring out what to keep/remove when going for new versions. But also great videos regarding other topics.

So far i’ve seen nothing that rings any alarm bells. The open source community can sometimes be a bit too sensitive regarding paid services linked to open source software. But in this case as long as the actual software remains open source, and the paid part actually adds value (a nice place to exchange sheet music, without any copyright issues as that’s covered by your payment, so a very legit reason to ask money), why not?

No it doesn’t?

I just googled it to be sure, but i already assumed you meant ‘spyware’ (which is something completely different), referring to the telemetry (which i can get is a sensitive thing, but anonymous usage statistics to know where to focus their development sounds like a decent idea, and afaik they implemented it with respect for the user)

But is that the fault of XML, or is the data itself just complex, or did they structure the data badly?

Would another human readable format make the data easier to read?

There are people who find XML hard to read?

Yeah, try that one in court. No your honor, i didn’t pay for the murder, i paid for someone who paid for someone to commit the murder. I’m obviously innocent!

It’s a plain stupid argument to try and make, and it makes no sense. And i’m not even vegan, i just recognize that yes, a part of the money i pay for meat goes to who kills it, so i pay for someone to kill animals for me so i can eat them. That’s how the world works, and denying that is just ridiculous.

What do you mean by forcing being the wrong word? Do you give the cat a bowl of meat and a bowl of vegan alternative for a month, and then see what the cat chooses? That would not be forcing imo. But i doubt that’s happening anywhere.

Ok, i get it, it’s fun to hate on the vegan, but he’s right and you’re not.

If you buy meat somewhere part of the price is you paying for the person that killed it. That’s obvious right?

Of course in relation to the cat, even if there’s a healthy vegan diet possible, he’s wrong imo. Why force our choices onto pets?

Let’s just say you’re right, it’s perfectly possible and healthy for the cat.

Does that make it ethical to force a carnivorous hunter animal on a vegan diet? Are you going to force it to stay inside to limit the possibility for it to catch mice & birds just to be sure?

Just beyond the physical possibility, how ethical is it to force our choices onto our pets?