![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
Real question here: has anyone else had luck side-stepping the Live365 signup during/after install? I’ve done this, and I’m very confused that more people haven’t.
Real question here: has anyone else had luck side-stepping the Live365 signup during/after install? I’ve done this, and I’m very confused that more people haven’t.
Is that MIT (munch it today) or GPL (generally pleasing w/lettuce) licensed?
I’ve been in situations where I wanted to retain credit/ownership of ideas and code, but wanted to be able to use them in the workplace. So building a MIT/BSD licensed library on the weekend and then importing it on Monday was the only game in town. I get the portfolio piece and my job is easier as a result. But I stick to non-novel and non-patentable stuff - “small” work really, as Stallman is quoted here..
In some work environments, GPL or “GPL with an exception” would never get the kind of traction it should. Lots of places I’ve worked lack the legal and logistical framework for wrangling licenses and exceptions. It’s hard to handle such cases if there’s literally nobody to talk to about it, while you have automated systems that flag GPL license landmines anyway. The framing is a kind of security problem, not a license problem, so you never really get to start.
The two licenses have distinct use cases, and only overlap for some definitions of “free” software. I also think both the comic artist and OP set up a fallacious argument. I’ll add that in no way do I support Intel’s shenanigans here.
The comic author takes one specific case of an MIT licensed product being used in a commercial product, and pits it against another GPL product. This ignores situations where MIT is the right answer, where GPL is the wrong one, situations where legal action on GPL violations has failed, and all cases where the author’s intent is considered (Tanenbaum doesn’t mind). From that I conclude that this falls under The Cherry Picking Fallacy. While humorous, it’s a really bad argument.
But don’t take it from me, learn from the master of logic himself.
commonly referred to as “cuck licenses”
This sentiment makes the enclosing sentence an Ad-hominem fallacy, by attacking the would-be MIT license party as having poor morals and/or low social standing. Permissive licenses absolutely do allow others to modify code without limit, but that is suggested to be a bad thing on moral grounds alone. That said, I’d love to see a citation here because that’s the first I’ve heard of this pejorative used to describe software licensing.
I think what burns people the most is that after Photoshop 5 or so, GIMP stopped keeping up with all the improvements in the later Photoshop versions. People making the jump from 2024 Photoshop to 1996 Photoshop UI/UX are gonna have a bad time.
Edit: as a software developer I can say that I’ve never seen a user more frustrated, sometimes even irrationally so, when they are forced to re-learn muscle memory to perform a familiar task. I’ve also seen people practically riot at the mere suggestion that this will happen. If you wish to curry favor with your userbase, never ever, remove keyboard accelerators, move toolbars around, break workflow, etc.
Hate that my government is apparently dead set on all of us driving massive trucks and SUVs spending thousands to money lenders, auto manufacturers, and dealerships over realist vehicles.
Doubly so if those parties are campaign contributors. Always follow the money.
If it’s open, looks don’t matter. Also doesn’t matter if the drivers are trash, or if it runs zero games. It’s all fixable trash - that’s the point.
(Also, that’s not a GPU, but it’s the thought that counts)
The problem is that requirements refinement has been unceremoniously dumped in your lap. The failure here is organizational; maybe you have a design person involved, maybe devs are expected to do this. Either way, your job now also includes communications.
One strategy I’ve used is to draw a low-fi example of what they’re going to get - Figma is great at this these days. Then I add it to the issue and push the whole thing back for early approval in order to suss out these finer points.
Not to come off as misanthropic here, but many people are hot garbage at describing what’s in their head. Most of the time, it’s all abstract concepts up there until you start asking the real questions. They really do need a whole-ass conversation to sharpen that mental image. Or in this case, what they want that feature to look like. Incidentally, this is also the reason why therapy is a thing, and why it takes people years to make sense of themselves, and that outcome is usually far more crucial than anything we’re doing at the keyboard.
Honestly I don’t mind the indentation since C isn’t going to give us many ways to address this with as little code.
That said, with compilers that are good at inlining trivial functions, I really do appreciate the “it does what it says on the tin” approach to using functions on things like this. Even if they’re only used once. Comments would help too.
The logic in these if statements is inscrutable on a cold read like this. To me, that’s a maintenance risk; imagine seeing a snippet this size on a PR. Having functions that name what the hell is going on could only help.
In a one-liner competition, sure.
In my codebase? I’d pull a “let’s linger after standup about your PR” and have the coder sweat through a 10 minute soapbox about nothing before laying down the law.
One nit: whatever IDE is displaying single-character surrogates for ==
and !=
needs to stop. In a world where one could literally type those Unicode symbols in, and break a build, I think everyone is better off seeing the actual syntax.
can also get a gun and blast these things before it gets out of hand
Honestly, I get the distinct impression that everything in the hunting section at your local Walmart is going to be woefully ineffective. May I recommend a defensive position with difficult to traverse stairs?
Sometimes, aptitude and an ability to learn and grow is more valuable than having specific technology knowledge. It suggests a more generalist take on one’s career, which means they are always going to be useful. There’s also something to be said for “soft skills” and a person’s overall attitude. All this can make the balance for a lack of technical experience, provided they have demonstrated talent an ability to close such gaps.
Other times, the whole hiring process is just completely broken. Your friend may have had to contend with co-workers that were utterly incapable at their jobs.
You had a day or two […] none of the last 5 candidates could even send in a solution that would run.
As harsh as this sounds, this test was doing its job. Assuming you’re not hiring junior candidates, that is.
One day is enough to research XSLT enough to get the gist, and two is enough for a polished solution. And since we’re just stripping tags, we’re really just selecting for all the inner text, which is weird but not hard to do with the right selector expression. The task also selects for people that understand XML processing as programmatically manipulating a DOM, which is crucial to wrapping your head around more advanced tasks.
More like: it’s eventually going to break your weekend or even your whole week, but you don’t get to pick which one.
Edit: To put that in perspective, there are 260 working days in a year. Let’s say that you have just one of these hardware failures in a five-year career with the MTA. That’s roughly 1/1000 odds. If the lottery had chances like that, you’d play it every time.
My theory: the system they purchased was based on an older and proven design for railway automation and control. Add to that however said company/contractor was set up to support their customers (e.g. OS only ships on floppy). That said, I agree that ten years without so much as a drive upgrade is a bit long in the tooth for something that can kill people or become a logistic and/or political disaster if it malfunctions.
This is interesting. The longevity of this legacy tech may be secure if they use the right channels.
SoCal happens to have a very active retro-computing scene right now, much of which is in the bay area. If they can breathe life into an Apollo Guidance Computer, bog-standard floppy drives will be a piece of cake.
On the other hand, the same scene has modern emulation for just about every (popular) legacy media format imaginable. Upgrading the drives to use SD cards and USB thumbdrives is something they could buy off the shelf today: Apple II, C64, Tandy, misc. So there’s no reason to suffer through hardware failures when more reliable tech is available.
There are even commercial options out there. Example: https://www.shopfloorautomations.com/hardware/floppy-connect/
More: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_disk_hardware_emulator
A few things come to mind here.
I mean, I like WSL for what it is. Having suffered through the limitations of MinGW32 and Cygwin, I appreciate that the WSL simply “just works.” But I’m also not kidding myself, as one could get the same experience from VirtualBox and a little more elbow-grease. I also like how the WSL automatically exposes a host-only SMB mount, making the Linux filesystem a lot more accessible from the very start.
What I don’t appreciate is that the WSL places the Linux firewall outside the Windows firewall. Locking that thing down can be daunting for a novice, if it’s ever done at all. Considering that the main use-case for this is development, that means there can be a lot of WSL setups out there with exposed and vulnerable web services on 'em.
Wait, what?