I'm fine reviewing, if I'm familiar with the task, codebase and especially if I've been involved with the proposed technical solution.

reviewing gen code? Hell, NO!

"we'll all be peasants by 2027" 🥴

yep. you gotta be super explicit in what you don't want.

edit: and tell it to google if the first answer is weird, so the next one is "informed". otherwise it halucinates into oblivion

ah frick. wakeup call

your machines

git add remote laptop ...

imo, it's fake as it's a "wate of time"

or with ll alias for ls -laF, I'm using it so often, even if it's not available, I still type it 5 times a minute.

privacy, bro...

this ain't a criminal court. It's ok to be helpful to a degree, especially if a bunch of people can't work because of that issue.

yea but the counter was that they need to move fast.

In the beginning, tests slow you down, but in time, the amount of bugs tests catch and the confidence in refactoring adds up to way more saved time.

edge is chrome

yup. it's a breeze especially for interpreted langs. mount the source code, expose the ports and voila. need a db?

services:
  pg:
    image: postgres