Bro needs to go big. Why not all electronics and electronic systems in general? As it is he could still be “caught with his pants down” by another speculative execution bug.
I constantly feel the need to argue with this dumb fuck and his 99% wrong opinions. I usually have to take a step back, remember it’s not worth it, and then move on. It would be a great help if I had a Firefox add-on that precedes all of musk’s tweets with "retard weighing in: ", just as a reminder that he’s also allowed a point of view, despite his mental issues.
I remember someone once created a firefox addon that made all of Trump’s tweets look like they were drawn with crayon. Someone should make a new version of that for Musk.
Pretty sure you‘re only using the r-bomb and „mental issues“ in a joking way but its kind of not funny.
Musk is a spoiled, unempathetic, overhyped idiot who claims to be autistic… perfect example that autistic people can be cretins as well.
But a lot of autistic people are getting called the r-word and its not ok. Mental (health) issues are not a stigma. They are okay and normal. Being an asshole isnt normal or okay though.
A little disturbing, ngl. Some might have grown up in a time or place where getting bullied and mistreated was no bid deal. Its actually good to see these things changing.
[…] by Late Latin normālis had also come to mean “according to a rule”, from which modern English senses of the word derive: in the 1800s, as people began to quantitatively study things like height and weight and blood pressure, the usual or most common values came to be referred to as “normal”, and by extension values regarded as healthy or desirable came to be called “normal” regardless of their usuality.
I don’t think anyone of sane mind would argue against the notion that it’s more desirable, and by definition healthier, to be born neurotypical than neurodivergent.
By the “divergent” part of the word, you’re right.
It would be like saying “it’s normal to be abnormal”. While it’s true that not everybody is identical, and everyone has their quirks, by defintion “abnormal” is not “normal”.
I have read that Google is dumb and potentially malware carrying extensions sometimes slip through their security and onto the chrome store. Is it true and how does it apply to Firefox
No, the flip side of this wish is your knowledge is frozen in time to when you make the wish and can never be updated. You gradually become more and more outdated as you fail to grasp even the simplest of changes to all languages in current usage.
Oh no, does this include all hypothetical alternate interpretations of the same code? So, you just look at the screen and go “yep, it definitely could mean something”?
My gods. I think this just gave me flashbacks to this week.
I was recently battling node’s import/require shenanigans trying to figure out how to import a typescript module in my basic program. I feel this so hard.
I walked away utterly hating the language and its ecosystem. Utterly defeated, I gave up.
Even though comments are very helpful, often it’s even enough to name variables and methods/functions really good. At least do that. You don’t want i, j and value. Believe me. You want rowCount, colCount and deliveryOption instead. You just may not know it now, but you will, when it has to be changed in a few months.
Where comments are useful most is in explaining why the implementation is as it is. Otherwise smart ass (your future self) will come along, rewrite it just to realize there was indeed a reason for the former implementation.
Comments are good when you’re doing something weird to handle an edge case or something. But yeah most of the time clear variable names, and extracting complicated code to a dedicated and clearly named function, are enough.
There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation and naming things.
I don’t understand, isn’t it what is required for junior positions these days, every manager would tell you that they also required soft skills. His wish won’t even land him a job.
My head canon is that Tony Stark has a superpower: everything he builds works the first time.
If it’s really complicated, like an entirely new Iron Man suit, then it might malfunction once in an amusing way. Then he tightens a screw and it’s perfect. It never fails outright or bricks itself.
In my experience, this is not how hardware or software development goes. I want this power so much.
Agreed. It’s comical how he’s seemingly able to rapidly build stuff that requires experience in multiple high end fields and then he even surrounds himself with his own tech and is not buried under maintenance hell for it all.
My alternative head canon is that he’s actually only good at building AIs and Jarvis and Friday are the ones who actually make all of his crazy ideas work.
I know literally 0.0000000001% of 1st year CS, and even I know that Musk just googled what “type” means in this context. No shit a compiler can determine the type at compile time. That’s not what the post was about, Elon my guy.
I’d just wish to not be in Hell talking to Satan… I mean, literally anywhere else talking to literally anyone else is by definititon a better situation to be in.
To all contradictory replies, I said NOT be in Hell.
Why limit yourself like that? Just say “All languages”. Depending on how liberally you interpret the word “language”, you know know just about everything.
Oh you don’t want to know exactly how many pubes your grandmother shed in her lifetime? You don’t care to know what the sewage of tasted like in London on Sunday, the 16th of July 1882? You don’t burn with desire to learn what it feels like to get your viscera torn out by a hungry lion?
I dunno. You’d know exactly what it looks and smells like too, and what it’d feel like on your tongue. Depends on how vivid your imagination is.
I can’t visualise things, but when people ask me to “visualise an apple” I can feel the waxy exterior, the crispness (or gumminess of an old apple), the slightly floral scent before you bite into it, what it sounds like, etc.
Can’t fucking visualise it to save my life though.
I can imagine sensation if I want, but as a ‘for instance,’ I know I don’t like some foods because of certain sensations, but don’t have to perceive them when I remember why. I can’t imagine that most people aren’t the same, or we’d have a lot more people gagging randomly as they walk around. Sure, some people will be slightly perturbed if you mention certain things, like fecal matter, horrible farts, the feeling of biting down on aluminum… but those perturbations pass in moments.
Interesting! There’s a particular type of fabric I cannot stand, and every time I think of it I get the sensation of touching it. Doing my best to not fling my phone away.
My old man told me he took one programming language in college and it was APL. Having looked at APL since becoming a software dev myself, I can understand why he hated it.
<span style="color:#323232;"> MODE UNIVERSE = [upb OF class universe, upb OF class universe]BOOL; STRUCT( INT upb, BOOL lifeless, alive, PROC(REF UNIVERSE)VOID init, PROC(REF UNIVERSE)STRING repr, PROC(REF UNIVERSE, INT, INT)VOID insert glider, PROC(REF UNIVERSE)VOID next ) class universe = ( # upb = # 50, # lifeless = # FALSE, # alive = # TRUE, # PROC init = # (REF UNIVERSE self)VOID: FOR row index FROM LWB self TO UPB self DO init row(self[row index, ]) OD, # PROC repr = # (REF UNIVERSE self)STRING:( FORMAT cell = $b("[]", " ")$, horizon = $"+"n(UPB self)("--")"+"l$; FILE outf; STRING out; associate(outf, out); putf(outf, (horizon, $"|"n(UPB self)(f(cell))"|"l$, self, horizon)); close(outf); out ), # PROC insert glider = # (REF UNIVERSE self, INT row, col)VOID:( self[row-2, col+1] := TRUE; self[row-1, col+2] := TRUE; self[row, col:col+2] := (TRUE, TRUE, TRUE ) ), # PROC next = # (REF UNIVERSE self)VOID:( [0:2, LWB self-1:UPB self+1]BOOL window; # init row(window[LWB window, ]); window[LWB self, 2 LWB window] := window[LWB self, 2 UPB window] := window[UPB window, 2 LWB window] := window[UPB window, 2 UPB window] := lifeless OF class universe; window[LWB self, LWB self:UPB self] := self[LWB self, ]; FOR row FROM LWB self TO UPB self DO REF []BOOL next row = window[(row+1) MOD 3, ]; IF row NE UPB self THEN next row[LWB self:UPB self] := self[row+1, ] ELSE init row(next row) FI; FOR col FROM LWB self TO UPB self DO INT live := 0; FOR row FROM row-1 TO row+1 DO REF[]BOOL window row = window[row MOD 3, ]; FOR col FROM col-1 TO col+1 DO IF window row[col] THEN live +:= 1 FI OD OD; self[row, col] := IF window[row MOD 3, col] THEN live -:= live = 3 FI OD OD ) );
</span>
If I was at any moment perfectly aware of every minute detail of every programming related topic, and could also apply it perfectly, I honestly think I’d get incredibly stressed and depressed. Stressed from all the billions of projects that I could improve, and would kinda feel the obligation to improve. And depressed because the whole reason I like programming is the learning part. Almost every project I start will end at the point where I learnt the most significant new stuff and it comes down to doing things that I know how to do. It’d ruin my primary hobby (and job) for me, which probably wouldn’t result in me being very happy.
programmer_humor
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.