xia

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
 

Yes, in part that they don't care that they are making more work for me (logging back in to every site), but moreso that they don't care how (or that) their website is broken.

If I, through ordinary use of a website, can get it into an inconsistent state, then other users probably are too. Isn't the site-specific state VALUABLE in diagnostics? Shouldn't your SREs be itching to get ahold of a bonafide failure case? Why is it the first thing that is so carelessly destroyed?

In theory, even if they are getting flooded with tickets from their broken website... what if it's not THAT known issue your site is dealing with, but a DISTINCT issue that might not be solved by the same solution. Where is the science/knowledge process here?

Yes, I ought to be able to cast it into a perspective of them trying to unblock me as fast as possible, but for some reason... hearing something so blithe tends to send a clear signal that you want me to quickly go away and stop bothering you... that they don't care in general.

[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 23 hours ago

I guess we don't even need an image.

[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 day ago

Upper management sees staff as their courtiers...

My compliments to your vocabulary and effective word choice.

[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 day ago

I don't see why... once you "buy a column" (which you must weigh the trade-off towards readability), subsequent uses of that column on other lines are free (save the line itself, of course).

[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Ok... just for you, I will extend the saying to be "every line and column is a liability".

[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Even then, so the theory goes... every line of code is a liability, it is only emergent properties of the system as a whole that makes it an asset. It takes but one line to destroy it's value, and in general a 2kloc codebase is more valuable than a 4kloc codebase, if they do the same thing. QED? :)

 
 
[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 2 days ago

I hate that I like this.

[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 2 days ago

Violation on the field, meme is not self-contained... first down vote.

[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 days ago

That is certainly a possibility. As I recall, the video was not focused on "zoom to the stars" but something else (I'm thinking it was "you can actually see the moon moving through the sky"), so I'm more inclined to believe that I am either mis-remembering the "stars" part of the video, or that what I saw in the video was not stars (maybe Venus, Jupiter, or satellites) as it was certainly not a vast high-contrast star-field...

[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 5 days ago (2 children)

This was years ago, so I doubt I could find it now. Nonetheless, it looked something like this (zooming in and blue sky turns black): https://www.youtube.com/shorts/dJ28M29k4MY

[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Is that suse-on-a-phone just a tease, or something awesome I have yet to discover?

[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 5 days ago (4 children)

I recall seeing one of these hyper-zoom videos on yt where they zoomed into the blue sky and at one point it turned black and stars appeared. I imagine the same holds true for LEO sats... you just need to get past that isoluminescnce barrier?

[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

It seems like I'm adding a new "secure private messenger" to my research queue every week. One would think it's straight forward enough to solve, and that we would settle on one or two as a gold standard.

 

...we all do.

 
 
 
 

I'm not sure what the business-theory is behind putting that extra expense in (or how they suspect it will make me more likely to take a chance on their business) but it has a very odd cumulative effect... as if a constant reminder that strangers are looking at my residence.

view more: next ›