what is the usecase for going beyond maxint?
There are many examples of applications that leverage integer overflow, either wrapping around or saturating values.
I don’t have an account there because of that reputation, and why would I now that I have access to chatgpt?
I think StackOverflow is rolling out a GPT-based service that generates answers to your questions based on SO's data.
You need to train ChatGPT to get it to output decent results. SO seems to be working to do that for you.
I love the idea of being able to fit 4 big D’s
I'm more interested in knowing whether the charger actually supports that type of usage.
Poorly defined nomenclature. Simple as that. I’m an “automation engineer”, have had many other titles (...)
Anyone can call themselves what they feel like it. However, in some jurisdictions and contexts the title "engineer" does have a specific meaning, consisting of someone who not only has the necessary and sufficient training but also is a member of a specific professional body. These credentials have meaning and those who try to pass themselves off as one without having the certification or credentials might be breaking laws.
(...) so more open standards and just Web apps instead of proprietary apps
What do you classify as "proprietary apps", and from the user's standpoint where do you see a difference between them and web apps?
Even then, you’ll still want to have in mind instances known for spam, bots, or shady content have been blocked.
Is there a list tracking these instances?
how centeralised GitHub
It's a pointless and irrelevant remark. Mozilla uses Git to track work on Firefox. GitHub provides Git repositories. I can clone Firefox out of GitHub, create an account on GitLab/Bitbucket, push the code there, and GitHub does not feature as a concern at all.
What point can you possibly think you're able to make regarding GitHub?
GitHub is enshittifying everything that has to do with Git.
Nonsense. Speaking as someone who actually hosts the same projects on GitHub and other version control providers, GitHub does not even feature as an implementation detail.
I'm starting to think you're just trolling.
You should care.
I do my best to not waste my time with irrelevant nonsense. It's silly to believe that the version control system you use has any influence on the quality of the software you deliver.
Surely you got a bonus and a raise out of it right? Right??
The only reward I got from it was recognition from my team members, which was already more than what I was expecting to get.
My manager was praised for the higher team velocity and improvements in the team's burndown chart. The hallmark of having done good work is seeing others trying to take credit for it.
I think that it’s because a) the abstraction does solve a problem, and b) the idealized solutions aren’t actually all that simple.
I'd go a step further and state quite bluntly that these critics do not even understand the problem that the abstraction solves, and their belief is formed based on their poor and limited understanding of the problem space.
Everyone can come up with simpler alternatives if they throw most requirements out of the window. That's basically the ages old problem caused by major rewrites and their expected failure once the unknowns start to emerge.
But I still agree with the article because I also think that a) the problem solved by the added abstraction isn’t practical, but emotional, and b) the idealized solutions aren’t all that complex, either.
Hard disagree.
There is not a single technical argument refuting these abstraction layers; only ignorance of the problems they solve. It's easy to come up with simpler solutions if you leave out whole sets of hard requirements.
The idealized solution never leaves the conceptual stage because the idealized solution is never thought all the way through and the key requirements are never gathered. That's when the problems solved by the abstraction layers rear their head, and what forces these critics to face the fact that their proposed solution is inconveniently converging to the real world solution they are complaining about, but that they are reinventing the wheel poorly.
What's wrong with automating processes?
Does it have to?
If you're a developer looking for a pastime working on a personal project, no. You're free to waste your time and effort doing anything that pleases you.
Everyone else in the world only bothers with something if it provides any value at all. If a project such as this one fails to provide any value them no one will have any reason to waste their time with it, no matter how many times you rewrite it in Rust.
I'm sorry, but I'm afraid the article is quite good.