I've only been bullied once, so it's hard for me to really talk outside of that single time. I'm different and I've never given too many fucks about social norms or hierarchies, and I guess a bully from two grades above me took that as a sign I would be a good victim. Anyway, I knew what way he walked home, so the day after he had bullied me I hid in a bush. When he walked by I ambushed him with a stick and demanded he give me his school bagpack... I hoisted it into the school flagpole the next day... Like a total psychopath. Looking back on it, it's frigthening how few consequences there was for what was obviously way out of line. I guess the early 90ies were just a different time.
He probably had a shit life, but I never saw him bully anyone again.
I'm mid fourties and I remember bordercrossings were annoying back in the 90ies. I'm Danish so we didn't enter Schengen until around 2000. I guess it didn't help that I was young enough that we traveled by bus. Once when we were on a school trip to Prauge we had the Slovakia borderpatrol go through our entire bus while waving machineguns around.
> we had the Slovakia borderpatrol go through our entire bus while waving machineguns around
Quite common in Eastern Europe before Schengen. That's why we hate border patrols, police and all sorts of uniformed men in general. They used to cut young people's blue jeans or long hair back in the '80s and bribing them was common before 2005. We also had quite a lot of policemen jokes (they were called militia men before 1990). One goes like "Why do militia men work in couples? Because one knows how to read and the other knows how to write.". I used to wish that we join Schengen so we no longer have to deal with border police any longer and they'd lose their jobs or get moved to a different border. If finally happened. Now Germany Poland, Austria and also other EU states introduce "temporary" border checks. Which they keep extending. Great.
I thought they worked in groups of 3: one knows how to write, the second knows how to read, and the third is there to keep an eye on the dangerous intellectuals.
> Now Germany Poland, Austria and also other EU states introduce "temporary" border checks. Which they keep extending. Great.
Yeah. Though I live close to a Slovakia-Austria border crossing and use it frequently and it is quite apparent these are border checks in the name only. Pedestrians and bikers are not checked at all; passenger cars are waved through and only vans and busses seem to be actually stopped for a check and even that depends. Still sucks compared to no border police presence at all.
I crossed the Austria-Hungary land border at Hegyeshalom in... 2017? They had "border checks" in place. I was driving a German-plated rental car, and my wife and I are obviously of European descent. They waved me through before I could even pull our (USA) passports out to show them.
Correct, and not just Germany. I have travelled all over Europe by bus and train. In recent years borders have been making a comeback, despite Schengen. Buses are target number 1 for border police.
Last year my bus took nearly an hour to get across the Serbia-Croatia border, which is technically a Schengen border, but Serbia is surrounded by Europe so security is usually lax. We all had to get off and go through passport control while the police combed the bus. Meanwhile, car traffic was being waved through without the slightest formality. Infuriating.
Wait! It was not a typo. Serbia-Croatia is indeed a Schengen border (Croatia is in Schengen). My point was that there was anti-bus discrimination even at this low-security border.
At the supposed non-borders within the Schengen zone, police are increasingly present. Often they get on buses (and trains) just to check out the passengers, obviously looking for passengers with migrant profiles.
Two or three years ago I crossed the ultra-low-security Germany-Denmark border on a local bus. There was no border security but I overheard the driver making an intentional phone call to someone to say that he had a foreign tourist aboard. Schengen has not completely abolished borders, alas.
Btw, long distance busses have a really strange history in Germany.
The literal Nazis made a law that virtually banned long distance busses inside of Germany, and the market was only liberalised in 2013. Deregulation and liberalisation often get a bad rep, but they have done a lot for us.
(To be more precise, the Nazis didn't outright ban long distance busses directly, what they did was give the government railway monopoly a veto over most bus routes and lots of extra restrictions. Which amounted to the same result as a ban. Just like the US doesn't directly ban buying from the world's most popular electric car brand or importing photovoltaic cells: they just slap outrageous 100%+ tariffs on them.)
As cool as this is there won't be an European alternative as long as all the apps you'd want to use on a smartphone require either Google Play or the Apple App store.
I believe thats being phased out slowly to be native app only with their multidevice HarmonyOSNext (mobile/pc). Once the major apps move over , last bits of linux will be excised.
Can it run all of the kinds of apps that people (in the EU/US markets, which is relevant to the discussion at hand) actually want to run? SalifishOS doesn't even do that, at least not for me.
If I remember correctly they have had a translation layer for android apps since they launched. But it's similar to what Apple has done with Rosetta 2 where it getting phased out for native apps only.
The will to create an OS is 0.0001% of the problem. There are tens of thousands of applications that people need to use that exist only for iPhone and Android.
There are dozens of functional mobile OSes. And OS isn’t useful unless it has application support for the tasks people want to accomplish, though.
I think it's more of an EU problem. We have so many public apps that rely on two big American tech companies solely because the EU has yet to figure out an alternative app store with enough security to make those apps available. This likely made sense 10 years ago, but today with all the talk about digital sovereignty it's frankly a little weak. It's not the OS that is the issue though, I could use graphene or similar just fine, but they wouldn't let me run a single of the apps that are the sole reason I have a smartphone. Well.. maybe the Microsoft authenticator?
I mean, I have to write exit strategies from Azure because the EU might demand our industry to leave non-EU infra. Yet ironically the digital company ID I would need to sign new contracts with within Europe aren't available without one of the two app stores. It's not that I can't sign those contracts without the ID, but I'd probably have to go to Germany in person.
Access to the Play Store requires the proprietary Google Play Services code, so I doubt this has it. The alternative would be installing apps via APK files.
According to Wikipedia,there are apps that provide an emulated Android environment ("Easy Abroad", "Droitong"), they're incomplete and glitchy, and a lot of important apps won't run at all (including banking apps and streaming services).
Microsoft did some research on it 15-20 years ago for .NET which showed that sync doesn't scale for I/O workloads. The rest of the world sort of "knew" at this point, and all the callback and statemachine hell which came before was also leading the world toward async/await but the Microsoft research kind of formed the foundation for "universal" acceptance. It's not just for single threaded JS programs, you almost never want to tie up your threads even when you can have several of them because it's expensive in memory. As you'll likely see in this thread, some lower level programmers will mention that they prefer to build stackful coroutines themselves. Obviously that is not something Microsoft wanted people to have to do with C#, but it's a thing people do in c/c++ and similar (probably not with C#), and if you're lucky, you can even work in a place that doesn't turn it into the "hell" part.
I can't say why Diesel.rs doesn't need async, and I would like to point out that I know very little about Diesel.rs beyond the fact that it has to do with databases. It would seem strange that, anything, working with databases which an I/O heavy workload would not massively benefit from async though.
We're a much smaller scale company and the cost we lose on these things is insignificant compared to what's in this story. Yesterday I was improving the process for creating databases in our azure and I stumbled upon a subscription which was running 7 mssql servers for 12 databases. These weren't elastic and they were each paying a license that we don't have to pay because we qualify for the base cost through our contract with our microsoft partner. This company has some of the thightest control over their cloud infrastructure out of any organisation I've worked with.
This is anecdotal, but if my experiences aren't unique then there is a lot of lack of reasonable in DevOps.
Isn't that mostly down to the fact the vast majority of devs explicitly don't want to do anything wrt Ops?
DevOps has - ever since it's originally well meaning inception (by Netflix iirc?) - been implemented across our industry as an effective cost cutting measure, forcing devs that didn't see it as their job to also handle it.
Which consequently means they're not interfacing with it whatsoever. They do as little as they can get away with, which inevitably means things are being done with borderline malicious compliance... Or just complete incompetence.
I'm not even sure I'd blame these devs in particular. The devs just saw it as a quick bonus generator for the MBA in charge of this rebranding while offloading more responsibilities in their shoulders.
DevOps made total sense in the work culture where this concept was conceived - Netflix was well known at that point to only ever employ senior Devs. However, in the context of the average 9-5 dev, which often knows a lot less then even some enthusiastic Jrs... Let's just say that it's incredibly dicey wherever it's successful in practice.
I politely disagree. I spent maybe 8 hours over a week rightsizing a handful of heavy deployments from a previous team and reduced their peak resource usage by implementing better scaling policies. Before the new scaling policy the service would scale out and new pods would remain idle and ultimately get terminated without ever responding to a request quite frequently.
The service dashboards already existed, all I had to do was a bit of load testing and read the graphs.
It's not too much extra work to make sure you're scaling efficiently.
You disagree but then cite another example of low hanging fruits that nobody took action on until you came along?
Did you accidentally respond to the wrong comment? Because if anything you're giving another example of "most devs not wanting to interface with ops, hence letting it slide until someone bothers to pick up their slack"...
The first time my director asked me if I'd ever heard of DevOps, I said, "Sure, doing two jobs for one paycheck." I'm a software developer, buddy. I write the programs. Leave me out of running them.
Here's the extent of my interest: I take my understanding of your use case and specifications, then I write source code that tries to generate as few instructions to suit your needs as possible while still being comprehensible to the next maintainer.
The app should write records to a database? Fine. Here's where you configure the connection. The app in production is slow because the database server is weak? Not my problem, talk to your DBA.
The app should expose an HTTP endpoint for liveness probes? Fine. It's served from the path you specified. Your reused it for an external outage check, and that's reporting the service is down because the route timed out due to your ops team screwing up the reverse proxy? Literally not my problem, I could not care less.
Allow me to politely pick apart the "Not my problem, talk to your DBA" comment from the perspective of someone who's worn every IT hat there is.
Okay, so, what is the DBA to do? Double the server capacity to "see if that helps"?
It didn't, and now the opex of the single most expensive cloud server is 2x what it was and is starting to dwarf everything else... combined.
Maybe it's "just" a bad query. Which one? Under what circumstances? Is it supposed to be doing that much work because that's what the app needs, or is it an error that it's sucking down a gigabyte of data every few minutes?
How is the DBA to know what the usecases are?
The best tools that solve these runtime performance are modern APM tools like Azure App Insights, Open Telemetry, or the like.
Some of these products can be injected into precompiled apps using "codeless attach" methods, and this works... okay at best.
So SysOps takes your code, layers on an APM, sees a long list of potential issues... and the developers "don't care" because they think that this is a SysOps thing.
But if the developer takes an interest and is an involved party, then they can integrate the APM software development kit, "enrich" the logged data, log user names, internal business metadata, etc... They log on to the APM web portal and investigate how their app is running in production, with real-world users instead of synthetic tests, with real data, with "noisy neighbours", and all that.
Now if Bob's queries are slowing down the entire platform, it's a trivial matter to track this down and fix Bob's custom report SQL query that is sucking down SELECT * FROM "MassiveReportView" and killing the entire server.
Troubleshooting, performance, security, etc... are all end-to-end things. Nobody can work in isolation and expect a good end result.
DBAs don't necessarily need telemetry in an app to diagnose an issue with the app's behavior. They can run a trace and see some SELECT is running a thousand times a second and deduce that it's being called in a loop over the result set of an earlier query. And they'd be right to say hey, this is an app issue, open a ticket with the developer.
If you put that responsibility on the developer--meaning you expect the dev to diagnose an issue that they introduced in the first place--what kind of result do you think you're going to get?
Layering these demands takes away from the overall quality of the application in my experience. You want an app developer to learn all about Prometheus so the app can have an endpoint with all these custom metrics, okay, and you want structured logging and expect the dev to learn how to use Kibana effectively? All that's a huge cognitive burden that eats a slice of the same pie (their brains) as domain knowledge, language & runtime knowledge, etc.
Get maybe one app developer to specialize, get maybe one app developer to cross-train with ops or monitoring even. But leave most of us out of it.
When you flip that expectation of developer involvement in operations, it exposes how unreasonable that arrangement is. Hey, DBA, the app is sucking up resources. Why don't you crack open an IDE and write a patch for it? What do you mean you don't know Go, what do you mean you don't use Git? Every DBA should know how to attach a debugger to a remote process, shouldn't they?
It's just exploitative. Or at least that's been my experience, so there's my bias.
I think the OO hatred comes from how academia and certain enterprise organisations for our industry picked it up and taught it like a religion. Molding an entire generation og developers who wrote some really horrible code because they were taught that abstractions were, always, correct. It obviously weren't so outside those institutions, the world slowly realized that abstractions were in many ways worse for cyclomatic complexity than what came before. Maybe not in a perfect world where people don't write shitty code on a thursday afternoon after a long day of horrible meetings in a long week of having a baby cry every night.
As with everything, there isn't a golden rule to follow. Sometimes OO makes sense, sometimes it doesn't. I rarely use it, or abstractions in general, but there are some things where it's just the right fit.
> I think the OO hatred comes from how academia and certain enterprise organisations for our industry picked it up and taught it like a religion.
This, this, this. So much this.
Back when I was in uni, Sun had donated basically an entire lab of those computers terminals that you used to sign in to with a smart card (I forgot the name). In exchange, the uni agreed to teach all classes related to programming in Java, and to have the professors certify in Java (never mind the fact that nobody ever used that laboratory because the lab techs had no idea how to work with those terminals).
As a result of this, every class from algorithms, to software architecture felt like like a Java cult indoctrination. One of the professors actually said C was dead because Java was clearly superior.
Java was probably close to 50% of the job market at some point in the 2000s and C significantly dried up with C++ taking its place. So I'm afraid everyone was right actually.
To be honest, I'm convinced the reason so many people dislike Java is because they have had to use it in a professional context only. It's not really a hobbyist language.
Just for the record, I don't think C ever dried up in the embedded space. And the embedded space is waaaay bigger than most people realise, because almost all of it is proprietary, so very little "leaks" onto the public interwebs.
Maybe I'm doing things wrong, but I assume this tool is meant to focus on cognetive complexity and not things like code quality, transpiling or performance, but if that's true then why does this:
(score is 7)
function get_first_user(data) {
first_user = data[0];
return first_user;
}
Score better than this:
(score is 8)
function get_first_user(data: User[]): Result<User> {
first_user = data[0];
return first_user;
}
I mean, I know that the type annotations is what gives the lower score, but I would argue that the latter has the lower cognetive complexity.
I get the same overall FTA score of 7 for both of your examples. When omitting the return type (which can be inferred), you get the exact same scores. Not just the same FTA score. Also note that `Return<User>` should be just `User` if you prefer to specify the return type explicitly. That change will improve several of the scores as well.
> Also note that `Return<User>` should be just `User` if you prefer to specify the return type explicitly.
No? first_user = data[0] assigns User | undefined to first_user, since the list isn't guaranteed to be non-empty. I expect Return to be implemented as type Return<T> = T | undefined, so Return<User> makes sense.
I'm not sure how you can infer types on this. Even if you input an array of users from a different function. How would we know that data[0] is a User and not undefined?
Then why use TypeScript at all? Just write js and put a TS definition on top. TS is a linter anyway. Now that will make the code easier to read, and in the end it is the code that will be interpreated by the browser or whatever JS runtimes.
Not really. TypeScript introduces optional static type analysis, but how you configure TypeScript also has an impact on how your codebase is transpiled to JavaScript.
Nowadays there is absolutely no excuse to opt for JavaScript instead of TypeScript.
What about debugging. Or with proper sitemap the code on the client-side can be debugged with the right map to the TS code?
Just feels like an extra layer of complexity in the deployment process and debugging.
With source maps configured, debugging tends to work out of the box.
The only place where I personally saw this becoming an issue was with a non-nodejs project that used an obscure barreler, and it only posed a problem when debugging unit tests.
> Just feels like an extra layer of complexity in the deployment process and debugging.
Your concern is focused on hypothetical tooling issues. Nowadays I think the practical pros greatly outnumber the hypothetical cons, to the point you need to bend yourself out of shape to even argue against adopting TypeScript.
I don't think this comment will contribute much, so please forgive that, but calling a "Collaboration between Europol and the Shadowserver Foundation" for "Euro cops" is probably the most Australian thing I've ever seen on the entire internet.
I enjoyed the title more that I want to admit TBH :)
In every country in Europe people are pissed with their government and hate the police but when its a "Euro" thing it feels much better.
The online narrative may make you think that "Europe" is a dirty word(chat control, cookie banner, regulations, fines etc), but its actually much more pure than any local politics and much much less divisive. The "Euro cops" phrase gives me the feeling of bunch of police officers that are not particularly fun at parties but are definitely not corrupt.
This reminded me of something Jean-Claude Juncker once said about democracy in the EU:
> We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it.
Being a step removed from local politics means they can do stuff without the immediate fear they're all kicked out, but the other downside of people not really caring who they elect is it's relatively easy to be elected on a "We hate the EU" line. It's a weird place.
There just isn't a better place to live (having lived in other places like the UK, US and CH, and visited many countries).
For example, when I meet European researchers, each has some things to bitch about their own governments, but we all agree the unity of the EU is very valuable, and that we are very grateful for what it has given us (democratic stability, freedom of movement, a vision for living together respecting and celebrating our cultural differences yet sharing key values).
In the media, in particularly in the UK, people had not much good to say about the "European beaurocrats". In contrast, I work with some very committed officers in Brussels that administer the Horizon Europe research programme, and they are doing a job as well as possible given legal and political constraints. How they work is too little known by the general public, which makes the EU bashing easy but not quite fair.
Be careful not to take it too much for granted (I'm not saying you are) - plenty of us in the UK felt how you feel, too! Just not quite enough of us, sadly.
The stuff they did in this particular case is likely a violation of all laws involved, just like the other recent case with the US Secret Service in New York City. In both cases they are seizing someone's business equipment, on the assumption that because it is an unusual business and sometimes it is used for spam, the business itself is spam.
Actually, it's probably legal in the USA, but completely illegal in the EU where the Digital Services Act regulation very specifically says that a mere conduit of data transmissions cannot be held liable for data transmissions passing through it which it didn't originate. I only know anything about the law in Germany (and I am not a lawyer) so let's pretend this happened in Germany - then the business operator - presuming that they're running a relay business and not spammers themselves - would win back all the money this police action deprived them of, including lost revenue, equipment costs, lawyer fees, and repairs for any damages incurred during the raid. Their cellphone provider is probably allowed to terminate their contract however, and could sue them if they had any meaningful damages. The civil court system here is very algorithmic as far as I'm aware: if(you broke the law) you.transfer(victim, victim.money_if_you_hadnt_broken_the_law - victim.money);
> We all know what to do, but we don't know how to get re-elected once we have done it.
Modern US variant: we will say whatever we must to amass donations to pay for the election campaign, but you'd be a fool to bet on our doing what we should once elected.
The EU has its advantages, but I'd never list "more pure" and "not corrupt" among them. The EU introduced lobbying (=legal corruption) into European politics when most countries historically didn't have much of it. It also has a massive amount of normal, God-fearing illegal corruption.
Many of the biggest stories about the EU are about or have a sizable aspect of corruption. Chat Control amd Thorn, Ursula von der Leyen and Big Pharma, Ursula von der Leyen and $anything.
Follow the Money is a thriving investigative journalism publication that lives off uncovering corruption in the EU.
On the contrary, EU is notoriously hard for the rich to lobby. It is also the primary motivation behind the super rich to be against EU since they too are having trouble to find someone in EU to solve their "problems". A famous anecdote is from Rupert Murdock who is able to influence UK poltics at whim but had no effect on EU: https://www.quora.com/When-I-go-into-Downing-Street-they-do-...
He was also a huge backer of Brexit.
On social media there's persistent and years long push to paint EU as anti-Business. They are pushing and pushing for de-regulations.
The Pfizergate is another great example of what happens when you have a centralized decision. That scandal only exist because of the Covid, an unprecedented situation where EU has to take quick actions and had to engage with companies directly. The scope of the scandal is also extremely benign compared to what you have in other places, it's essentially a transparency scandal. No one is even seriously accusing her of abuse of her position for personal enrichment when in a normal country this type of scandal is often about giving the contract to a relative of theirs or an election campaign donor.
Once the Ukraine war is over, I also expect to see other scandals to be unearthed as they were rushed to acquire weapons fast.
There are scandals like Qatar paying an MPs to push their agenda, but other than that EU is so much less corrupt than anything the local governments have. Those involved in the Qatar scandal went to prison, how many local politicians you have who go to prison for anything other than political reasons?
Have you noticed what has been happening in US since February for example? That one is extreme but all over EU the local governments have some sort of these scams and dealings. In countries like US all you have to do is to buy president's crypto coins or make a donation for his election campaigns. In EU, you simply can't do anything of this sort. That's why those who want influence actually pay social media influencers to push an agenda and this is considerably more expensive and hard compared to just establishing a relationship and paying up the president.
Many of EU's weaknesses are also it's strength since having full control and being able to move fast comes with its risks.
That's why across the EU the trust in EU and support for EU is way higher than any local governments. The worst is over %50 in favor of EU, when most of the governments consider themselves lucky if they are in the %30s.
We seem to be exposed to different information on the EU.
> notorious for rich people to lobby
I don't know about rich people, but companies seem to have a lot of success in doing so.
> Murdoch backer of Brexit
This is not evidence that the EU is hard to lobby. People across the political spectrum can be anti-EU: Corbyn, who's as left and as anti-corruption as they come, was a Leaver (and a UK with Corbyn as PM would have arguably been better off outside the EU, but I digress).
> Ursula, scandal only about transparency and not personal enrichment
I don't know how awarding billions of public funds in contracts and then deleting all messages, something she's done before while working for the German gov, is "not that bad" and not about personal enrichment, but about her great care for efficiency and the European pop...
> Those involved in the Qatar scandal went to prison, how many local politicians you have who go to prison for anything other than political reasons?
You're cherry-picking, powerful EU officials are as immune to justice as anywhere else, and plenty of examples exist in Member States of people going to prison for corruption. The former president of France just started his prison sentence, you might have heard. Those cases are the exceptions that prove the rule.
> Have you noticed what has been happening in US since February for example?
Few countries would look good on corruption if you compare them to "What has been happening in the US", FULL STOP. That the EU is not as far gone as the US has been for decades (thank fuck) is, again, no evidence of anything.
I invite you to peruse ftm.eu, as I'm on my phone: look at the criticism of OLAF's selective investigations, the watchdogs lacking any independence and finding that everything's just dandy with EU officials, the revolving doors across so many industries, the bribes and gifts, the insider trading, employment of family members, mismanagement of funds, etc. etc. etc.
The corruption in EU is indeed happening through local governments(EU allocates money for projects, local governments who actually end up getting the money to execute these projects siphon that to their cronies or to spice up the local economies), as per this article and the articles in ftm.eu
This is one article that says the European Commission is not aware of 90% of EU fraud cases: at this scale, this can't be brushed off as being the fault of member states.
> and the articles in ftm.eu
No. That is not what FTM investigations show. At all.
The site is paywalled, can't check the articles but at least one of the headlines is about the local government corruption(how Orban funnels Hungary's assets to its allies).
Since EU doesn't directly deal with anything, there's not much opportunity for corruption. It's almost always down the pipeline.
People deny things all the time. He used his media in favor of UK leaving EU, which is more consistent with him not being happy with his abilities to influence EU.
Okay, I may be exaggerating a bit the European's attitudes towards their local police and governments(some small and cold countries tend to trust their local police and government more than the larger countries at sunny places) but here you can see that EU is consistency viewed more favorably than the local ones through the years:
The trust levels in Police is much lower in larger countries. In Germany it’s %50 and %35. NL is not the rule, it’s the exception.
But sure, hating the police is an exaggeration. Still, I think it’s obvious that its for illustrative purposes and not a declaration. Just like everybody never means every single person no exceptions when talking about general situations. It’s like when you say “everyone knows that the flat earth theory is BS”. Yes it’s not everybody and your mileage may vary depending on the location.
I mean your version is much more entertaining, but there was a TV series (1988-1992) that was actually called Eurocops.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094456/
If it goes by WIFI and not the wired network it'll be rather of useless in every enterprise organisation I've ever worked in. I'm not sure I've even worked in a place where the WIFI wasn't a guest network. Don't get me wrong, I'd like the feature. I work in a fully flexible place, but part of that is setting your status to be "working from outside the office" when you're not there. If that could happen automatically that'd be great.
Was MERGE too slow/expensive? We tend to MERGE from staging or temporary tables when we sync big data sets. If we were on postgres I think we'd use ... ON CONFLICT, but MERGE does work.
He probably had a shit life, but I never saw him bully anyone again.