

I’m sure the ML Guys thought of that & tried to prevent it.
Deferring to authority is fine as long as you don’t make assumptions about what happened or didn’t happen.


I’m sure the ML Guys thought of that & tried to prevent it.
Deferring to authority is fine as long as you don’t make assumptions about what happened or didn’t happen.


brother you’re using the wrong thing. First of all you are using crypto that’s going to give you some memecoins that are obviously going to collide after 55 hours as what are you even doing not rugpulling the thing day 2?
Second of all, I am pretty sure you should use “RandomUUIDIToldYouSo” module for non-colliding hashes. We all know THAT thing gets its Noise from our parents’ instructions on doing a specific thing that keep changing arbitrarily every time you ask.


good thing my gmail is full of spammy bullshit.


Wait how did you identify it’s LLM generated? Was it the repetition of the headline in the post body?
staging sucks anyway. Never catches bugs.
you say that but they’re already thinking a step ahead and assuming meta left a backdoor or CVE at the behest of 3-letter agencies.
What’s facebook’s business plan? Right, surveillance capitalism.


My understanding so far is:
if business logic assumes a set of preconditions before a particular piece of code that the language/runtime/os satisfies… then it’s an immediate assert. Any kind of IO, memory creation and OS operations fall into this carefory.
However if the business logic assumes something in its own domain and that assumption does not hold then its better to handle that instead of crashing. Ex. being you expect a queue to have at least one element in some pipeline and if it is empty then return saying nothing to be done.
Edit: don’t assert/crash if your application is single process multithreaded unless you want your friend from accounting asking you why their stock ticker crashed just when they clicked a button in the coffee shop module of your app. Use some thread exit mechanism.


I wonder how it would look with excel sort


Here’s a couple of good starting points for the line:
if you have to sell your time/labour for money, you’re not rich.
if you can take a day off and not need to tell anyone about it and not lose money because of it, you’re rich.


use
display: flex
flex-direction: column
align-items: center
on the parent container


Stackoverflow is for senior devs to clown on junior devs. It’s the inverse of helping juniors.


THAT is the message you took from all this? What you’re going to root for the smug ignorant asshole?


We used to be able to do multiplayer only without the need for official servers.


it’s a bit of a straw man from your side to act like the discussion is about multiplayer when we are discussing about single player campaign based RPGs or about multiplayer when the company deliberately shuts it down in favour of a new version that just milks players for more money; or about toasters that definitely don’t need internet connection to function.


that’s the company’s problem. They made it too complicated.


also: Actively censorinv the mention of lemmy… at least on reddit as far as I am aware. Maybe even threads.


you’re missing the point of the meme. It’s showing you how republicans can’t be consistent even within their own reasoning system. And it is shocking how easily all of logic is discarded if the right people are promised to be hurt.


all well and good but there is one aspect which i disagree. Modern supply chains are an inefficient way to organize our economies. We are destroying flora and fauna at great speeds in the name of maintaining modern supply chains and convenience. We should not consume things which are not able to be produced sustainably and that means only having things that are produced locally.
World spanning supply chains are a symptom of greed, war-mongering, and anti-sustainability. they are world devouring activities.


when tech folk get milked by every other merchant and pay extra, while getting ripped off… we do feel like daily wage workers.
I feel like it is not wise to discard the opinion of a layperson with this reasoning. Sure experts have been working on it as their day job vs. Us just looking at the fruits of their labour. But that doesn’t justify the assumption that they are infallible. Don’t you agree in our own areas of supposed expertise we are often corrected or get inspiration from supposed laymen simply because we have been too myopic about solving the problem ahead of us?