@nike it's often both!

@iceb my original post is actually intended to literally bemoan the people who basically make a request for "intuitive and simple" the entirety of the requirements.

@iceb I guess I just don't think "design a product my 80 year old grandma should be able to use' is much better than "design a product, get to it"

@C0D4 that seems like a very broad statement. I have seen plenty of "technical" which is not paid feature.

If they want to do that then to some extent that is their prerogative, but it should be better communicated.

@Oktokolo thanks for explaining ribbons. Don't worry, per my comments I'm not looking at implementing anything.

@SuspiciousBug I mean 2007 sure, but as it continues to be popular to this day I'm not sure if we can so summarily dismiss it (although I do want to)

Just to explain myself: I don't want an IDE with this. But I do find it interesting that the ribbon is a very polarising subject.

I have met developers who are pro-ribbon. And I wanted to check if there are IDEs with ribbons. Because if there isn't, then the opinion of that camp feels a little bit like "Oh yeah ribbons are great - for other people. Not me, thanks!".

I am vehemently anti-ribbon. If I ever become world ruler I will find and prosecute the inventors of the ribbon (along with those who changed the 3x2 on the keyboard to a 2x4, or introduced fn keys). But I figured I'd ask in a way to try to avoid introducing bias.

Might be the Dunning-Kruger

- Not taking important notes.

- Not thinking important notes anywhere by failing to do anything more than superficially think about the problem at hand.

This is what peak performance looks like

@Demolishun some sort of Turing-Abstraction-Completeness 🤔 that one is beyond my ken...

All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection, except for the problem of too many levels of indirection

- David Wheeler / Kevlin Henney / Butler Lampson

^ this is a slackbot trigger for !abstract at my work

I would stand by my specifically worded point that my only value to greater society is essentially as a data processing unit. I do not think it is incongruent with the points made in replies.

- I do measure my success by the impact my work has on the people around me. But the value of that work is as a data processing unit

- My non-data interactions (eating/drinking/etc) has value to me and to some extent friends and family, but they are not 'greater society'

- Appreciate Harari can come across as overbearing and the concept of Data-ism is quite janky. But that doesn't belie the point that if I were replaced by a data processing chip that produced the same digital outputs I generated from the same digital inputs I received, I don't think greater society would be that effected.

This was meant as more of a tongue-in-cheek laugh than a rant, so in hindsight I guess I should have put it in random/showerthoughts instead of rant. My apologies for that!

I think the context here is interesting to think about, so here's one way to look at it. If you are trying to build a production grade compiler in a professional context then this is indeed the height of insanity.

If this is a university (or other education) project then arguably this has achieved its purpose. You have learned the above. This is wisdom. Any information or knowledge you have gained about Rust is a bonus (and I say that as a huge Rust fan)

I wonder if what a lot of Teams failure is due to the fact that Microsoft had to cater to a lot of enterprise compliance nonsense (ironically not an insignificant amount of which is their own). Instead of being able to hone in on a few singular epics, they were tied up with trying to build in compliance for ISO27001, integrating into the (various!) office stacks, (various!) identity management systems, and the hellish cross-cutting concerns between combinations therein.

It is a somewhat saddening possibility that it may yet triumph over Slack for what appears to be little other reason than Microsoft is able to wield its considerable clout to ram it down peoples throats (and the large scale enterprise organisations are quite happy to accept it, because making a business case to a bunch of boomers for another inch of the Microshaft is far easier to make when they're already balls deep - at least compared to something literally named slack)

Curious whether the OP means in a mongo-db-is-web-scale way, or a unabomber way. Why not both I guess..

@daglundberg to the authors credit, they say lowER level language and the context is with respect to Python, which I wouldn't really disagree with (although I wouldn't say myself).

Sure, it's amusing to see it bundled with 'C++/C#' in the context of lower level langauge but again, can't disagree with that specific context (both are lower level than Python)

@Voxera don't disagree with vantage point thing - I suppose without context (given the above, I guess that's not the situation in this specific case), one tends to assume the entire spectrum of programming languages.

I suppose the interesting philosophical thing here is that if you are looking across the entire spectrum of languages you could make an argument that nearly all programming languages are low level!

Maybe I'm a little out of touch but referring to C# as low level doesn't seem to be particularly common. At least, not common enough to take note of. Where is this happening?

What's even more frustrating is that this is largely because this is often due to just a lack of human decency. They are too lazy to fully and concisely describe their isssue in one shot, so are just relying on the cost of your immediate attention to eke the necessary information out of them over several excruciating and time consuming round-trip interactions like some sort of kindergarden teacher talking with a 1st grader.

@Fast-Nop thanks for that article. Very informative and an interesting way to frame it. It has made me better understand why large companies are incentivized to build all this nonsensical enterprise crap around their applications!

@aviophile I'm not overtly against proprietary standards per se, just noting here what I perceive as a downside to them. I think it's possible to do that without being a incentive hating communist

Bug bounties were floated at my work too. They were shot down based on the reasoning that by having a bug bounty, there is an implicit admission that (a) we have bugs and (b) we should be solving it ourselves and having to rely on external people smacks of ineptitude.

Seemed a little ivory-tower. I said it was like society not having rewards for crime tips because that was an admission that (a) crime exists and (b) if police can't solve it themselves they must be inept.

I also said we should get rid of our crash reporting (when the software crashes, user has the option of submitting an online report) because that was basically an admission that the software crashes.

Suffice to say nobody was convinced.

only 2 hours? in my opinion I'd count that as a win!

Putt's Law: "Technology is dominated by two types of people, those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand."

Ah yes, the flawed actuator code I wrote for the laughing gas analgesia device - although it was UB and did not perform at all to specifications, according to user satisfaction metrics it scored perfectly.

@NoMad I would be okay with having people that I didn't respect (whatever the reason - whether they have a faulty moral compass or incompetent) having respect for me. It does not have to be a mutually respectful relationship.

Practically speaking I think that overall it would be strategically advantageous.

Of course there are specific circumstances where it would not (for example as an underdog it might be better to have an opponent underestimate you) but such scenarios seem to be more the exception than the rule.

I'll go with everybody. If the question has no constraints, I'll answer without constraints.

Considering the way Microsoft build many of their apps (e.g. Teams, which for the most part is a single window app, despite current efforts underway to allow for multiple windows), they should consider dropping the plural and renaming their flagship product to Window

Rust be like 👀

@ItsaMeTuni @Diactoros primarily, it is so we can contact them to (a) notify them when that crash is fixed, (b) providing them with workarounds and (c) asking for further information to replicate the crash when it is not clear.

To provide some context we write fairly niche software used by engineering professionals. Our userbase is actually currently small enough that personally know and often work in close conjunction with the majority of our users. Odd as that may seem (and the challenges it presents with scaling notwithstanding), this has been consistently cited as our one of our greatest competitive strengths so is something we think carefully about.

A counterpart to this is Hanlon's razor. And while on an emotional level I also often feel this is the, the non-reptilian part of me realises there is a bit of cognitive bias at play.

Yes, I do reboot my computer every couple of days, but sleep is a pretty useful function in allowing you to quickly resume. More fool me for relying on it I guess.