[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 6 points 2 days ago

Well fuck, since that’s so much larger that what Pope said they could do I guess Boeing is filing for bankruptcy now and folding? They were holding nothing back then so clearly the company is going under now due to those greedy workers’

[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 11 points 4 days ago

Atwood refused to accept the science fiction label for a very long time. Le Guin is much kinder to her friend than Atwood was in person to many folks about this (this is harder to cite because older convention and genre drama doesn’t really show up online, unlike modern). In recent years, Atwood has accepted speculative fiction (the umbrella term for lots of stuff including SF) because it’s convenient for her and helps sales. She was and imo still is a huge genre snob. Don’t get me wrong, Atwood writes great stuff. She just hates a lot of her audience.

Why do I care? Compare and contrast her to Vonnegut, whose agent wouldn’t let him use the science fiction label but actively attended conventions, telling fans he wanted to be SF but the money folks wouldn’t let him. Octavia Butler is equally fantastic as is Atwood’s dear friend Le Guin. Both love SF and are happy with the label.

[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 8 points 5 days ago

What are some examples of things you don’t like? That’s really necessary to give examples. Science fiction usually has technology in some form or another. Sometimes it’s the focus of the story (eg The Last Question or Permutation City). Sometimes it’s a tool for the story (eg The Expanse or Neuromancer_). Other times it’s set dressing like magic in fantasy (eg Dune or Book of the New Sun). Outside of hard SF and beyond Golden Age SF you run into more “tech as device or background.”

[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 2 points 6 days ago

Technically you bought one book and left with one book. Had you walked into Powell’s for one and only one book you would have failed. You can’t buy a set without buying one.

[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 120 points 2 months ago

The most frustrating thing about this article is that it completely ignores that good movies targeted at kids still have to be good. Personal complaints aside, the new Mario movie was reasonably good for adults and great for kids. Pixar keeps churning out things that are fantastic on many levels. Bluey is an amazing show that can resonate with kids and parents. I don’t for a minute buy the elitist bullshit of “well you’re not a kid so you can’t comment.” Muppet Treasure Island holds the fuck up as an adult so this writer can fuck right off.

[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 85 points 2 months ago

Other answers have only called out rotating the secret which is how you fix this specific failure. After you’ve rotated, delete the key from the repo because secrets don’t belong in repos. Next look at something like git-secrets or gitleaks to use as a local pre-commit hook to help prevent future failures. You’re human and you’re going to make mistakes; plan for them.

Another good habit to be in is to only access secrets from environment variables. I personally use direnv whose configuration file is globally ignored via the core.excludesfile.

You can add other strategies for good defense-in-depth such as a pre-receive hook checking for secrets to ensure no one can push them (eg they didn’t install hooks).

[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 126 points 2 months ago

Teens are constantly sleepy because that’s how teens work. School start times especially make it impossible to for them to get proper sleep. I’d say it’s ridiculous that someone who has authority over teens doesn’t understand the fucking basics of teens but it’s the Us criminal justice system where authority is made up and the credentials don’t matter.

[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 91 points 7 months ago

Absolutes in programming tend to lead to bad designs. This is more a “I’m gonna stir up some shit on Twitter” post than real wisdom.

  • No microservices usually leads to bloated, tightly coupled logic that ignores business domains
  • No monoliths usually leads to sprawling microservice deployments with tightly coupled dependencies and flavor-of-the-week new ones
  • No Kubernetes usually leads to VPS pets or crazy obstacle courses trying to get SSL termination without a million fucking dependencies in a cloud container orchestration system that isn’t as good as Kubernetes
  • All Kubernetes usually leads to huge SRE costs for a tiny app

The same shit happened last summer when AWS came out with their “we dropped microservices for a monolith and look at our speed increase” article which ignored good design principles. Sometimes you should split things over business domains so you can deploy and code independently. Sometimes Kubernetes is the best way to handle your scale needs. The stories we normally read are about people doing it wrong (eg AWS making a bunch of microservices inside a domain sending fucking gigs of data between what should have been functions in a single service). Inexperienced folks don’t always know when to move from their minimum viable solution to something that can scale. That doesn’t mean you remove these things, it means you train on when you need them.

Should we abandon design patterns because singletons or flywheels aren’t the correct solution all of the time?

[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 92 points 11 months ago

This is known as revenge bedtime procrastination and capitalism plays a huge role in it.

[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 89 points 11 months ago

Nintendo does not sell hardware at a loss and, IIRC, has done so since the Wii. It was a huge deal back when they said they were going to make a profit off the hardware. Given how abysmally the Wii U did, I’m struggling to find coverage of that from 15yr ago that I only vaguely remember. However, that’s been a major point from Nintendo since the Wii, so it’s ridiculous that Epic wouldn’t know that and is clearly just an attack on Google (please don’t read that as me supporting Google or Epic).

[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 124 points 1 year ago

“Patent troll” and “required actions to preserve trademarks” are two totally different things. The former is objectively bad in all ways. The second is explainable if there truly is a trademark and said gear infringes on the trademark and may be excusable if the Linux Foundation is forced to act to preserve their branding (trademark law is weird). It’s even more explainable if this is a shitty auto filter some paralegal had to build without any technical review because IP law firms are hot fucking mess. I’m also very curious to see the original graphics which I couldn’t find on Mastodon. If they are completely unrelated and there was an explicit action by someone who knew better, the explanation provides no excuse.

Attacking any company because the trademark process is stupid doesn’t accomplish much more than attacking someone paying taxes for participating in capitalism.

[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 377 points 1 year ago

Swartz wasn’t involved in the origins of Reddit. He got involved when Y Combinator combined his company with Reddit (something along those lines?). He was not an actual founder, just an early influencer. In many ways, decoupling him from the shitshow that Ohanian and Huffman have engendered is a good thing.

This is very similar to the argument of Musk being a founder of Tesla.

view more: next ›

thesmokingman

joined 1 year ago