Maybe if it is a slow exchange. But I suspect, that trying that when the exchange is fast, will make one react way too slow. The inference happens by looking of how the opponent moved their racket/paddle. That starts way earlier, than one could possibly see it looking at the ball and tracking the logo.
Should not, true, but in the case of many websites the reality is that allowing JS means you lost your privacy. Just like one cannot allow webgl and canvas by default any longer.
Thanks to all the web devs who helped creating this web dystopia.
Yes, my point is that this does not mean it is an "opt in checkbox". I appreciate that it allows people to be nasty, it just isn't a "please be nasty" toggle.
If we are living in a democracy and in majority are able to live democracy, then yes. If on the other hand most people are not willing or unable to live democracy, then we will get stuck with corruption.
There is a danger in this. Small companies with delusional people in them will see "how the big guys do it" and try to apply this kind of thing in their own little fart of a business, making our dev/engineer lives miserable.
> At some point in the future, a lot of the SV techbros will be hopefully viewed as ghouls with no morals or ethics. This is not a subsection of humanity that should be dictating anything and yet they always do. If you complain about this and don't quit your job at Meta, you're failing an extremely basic check.
I hope you are right, though it will still take a long time, if it ever happens. The base premises of most people is still something along the lines of: Has money -> must be successful -> is smarter than most -> is right and cannot be wrong.
This kind of shortcircuited thinking is superbly annoying and harms us and the planet and every living being on it. I still remember clearly, when I explained to a Facebook fanperson, that FB is a criminal organization, just after they had to pay the highest fines ever for violating people's privacy. Despite the plain facts in front of them they chose not to believe me, because who am I, right? Just an IT person, who cannot possibly know shit, since I am not as rich and famous as Zucky the android.
Some people are forced to work in places, which are dehumanizing through work conditions, whether you get paid for it or not doesn't necessarily tell you much. Of course this is not the case for Mete employees, who should have an easy time finding other employment. But these trends are not limited to Meta. They might find application in some shithole of a badly paid job somewhere, where people have only the choice between living poorly in some slums, or serving their local tech overlord.
You are (hopefully) a human being firstly, and only in some later capacity "a vessel for my employer on Company time". It would do the world some good, if more people remembered, that they are working with people and their decisions affect people.
I cannot understand how in normative terms someone ought to be merely a vessel for someone in any capacity, ever. There are things you cannot do to someone and certain things you as an individual cannot sign away. That’s what “human rights” and similar frameworks are supposed to be about anyway.
Professors ... They are likely knowledgeable about the abstract things in computer science, but when it comes to actually writing code and guidance on that, I would only trust the ones, that have a background of getting deep into the code and actually making things. For example when I was studying I experienced a variety of professors:
One who was a Python core developer and who knew many languages and could "compile in his head" what the result of some code will be in assembly. I would trust this one.
One, who criticized my C code for having multiple procedures, because that would make it look after more pointers and told me it would be better all in one long procedure, lol, without ever even considering the readability. That one was likely also simply wrong because of the compiler probably inlining things anyway. That one taught a math lecture and used C. Needless to say I wouldn't trust that one when it comes to writing good code.
Then I had a math physics guy, who wrote Java 5 or earlier code when it was Java 8 times. That one didn't use generics at all, and cast to Object instead and whatever else. He also explained, that he uses bit shift in a for loop variable update, because that was faster than *2. Yeah, also wouldn't trust that one to give any advice on how to write good code. It taught me to be very skeptical of mathematicians writing code, unless they have a proven track record of software development skills. This kind of person is the reason why mathematicians and physicists should be supported by an actual software developer, to write their code, and not be too ignorant or arrogant to consider hiring one.
I also had one professor, who taught a math lecture in such a bad way, that it was hard to follow and even his writing on the blackboard was illegible. That one also had another lecture which was mostly talk about Internet and web concepts in one of the most grating accents imaginable, almost comical. I wouldn't trust that one to give advice on writing good code.
Hm, I find this one to be very dubious. When you make an effort to write correct code, you think hard. When you debug, it's more like just looking at the execution of what you have thought of before and thinking "OK where did I go wrong this time? Show me in the process." and it is usually much easier to see why something is wrong or at least at which step it breaks.
reply