Programmer Humor

Oh, you mean "move fast and break things"?

A litre of cola.

I agree. It heavily depends on the "things" you're breaking

If it's prod, that's bad

If it's your "fuck-around" branch, go for it

Once you are ready to go public though you need to be stable and secure

Is that really true though? If you have a product people actually want, they'll use it regardless of bugs

Isn't that what Elon did when he bought Twitter? Just randomly started unplugging shit?

But did you do it fast?

"Everybody knows you can have it done well, fast, or cheap. Pick two."

"No! All three! All the time! Zero drawbacks! All profits and benefits! I am a very good and visionary boss. Have some room temperature Little Caesar's on the house and make me rich."

Break things... Just not the things that affect me!

tbf, the breakage isn't supposed to be internal, but external. Old worn in structures, bureaucratic overhead, etc

Move things, breakfast.

And now I'm hungry.

That's a really terrible anecdote. Real life quantity group would find ways to do less and less for the same reward. You would end up with fifty pounds of clay with a fist shape indention. Call it a pot and be done.

That quote sounds like an excuse for mass production worship a la brave new world, lol.

Also, the comparison is stupid because we don’t write code, realize it was shit and write a new one.

I mean, you shouldn't, but it sounds like the quote-poster is asking for exactly that kind of boondoggle of a project.

...and then add a sticky note below it:

"And then Einstein and Obama and Jobs were there and everybody clapped they were so shocked!"

It seems like such a little story that it would probably have an origin. It doesn't seem like the ceramics class, the people who created the story mentioned, ever existed. When asked, they said it was actually a photography class (from the professor Jerry Uelsman). I'd also argue that while that may hold true for learning skills (if it does) it doesn't necessarily hold true for performing skills. Also I'd say the main reason it could work, is that it got them to actually do something.

Fun fact: some of those syrup bottles were filled with iced tea. Some. Not all.

I probably shouldn't even be using youtube in the first place, but 5 min ago I found out youtube is now forcing videos with an AI translated voice. While at the same time not having an option to change the audio track or disable the feature.

This feels like a good example of pushing features most people don't want while not providing a normal way to disable it.

Thank God I use revanced and can spoof the client as IOS TV, this gives you the option do disable that crap.

Firefox (even mobile) has this addon "YT Anti Translate"

It's pretty bad you have to go this far just to watch a video with the actual voice it was released with...

Meta's philosophy has bit them before, but they at least do it better than anyone else. Other companies hear the Meta philosophy and their CEOs take that as an excuse to underfund development to the point of constant errors and shipping broken products.

They don't seem to realize that the reason that Meta can operate that way is because they are / were relentlessly focused on figuring out why things broke and then building out new products and systems to let them keep working fast and breaking things without their being a big downstream impact.

They have incredibly robust testing, monitoring, and alerting systems in place for all of their products, including newly developed ones. They found it faster to work in a giant monorepo and share code, but they actually monitored and recognized when it scaled too big and was slowing development down and had teams building out custom version control software and virtual disk utilities to fix this (Microsoft did similar with Git when they moved Windows development to it), and when Meta found that coding in raw JavaScript and HTML was creating scaling difficulties with their app, they built React. Same thing with their customized version of PHP on the backend.

I don't think Meta's impact on the world has been positive, and I don't think they should move fast and break things from a product design and ethics standpoint, but from an engineering standpoint, I do have respect for how they have executed that philosophy, and think that literally everyone else who tries it fails because they view it as a way of cutting short term costs, instead of as a way to identify and build and fix long term infrastructure.

You wrote like someone who doesn't treat in prod. How nice that must be.