rockstarpirate

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Not so much creepy as hilarious

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 years ago

Yeah that’s true. The headline is asserting something that I don’t think Musk has actually said he will do. On the other hand, I’m having trouble thinking of any random idea Musk has had that he didn’t attempt to follow through on.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 years ago (3 children)

“It’s the only way I can think of to combat vast armies of bots,” explained Musk.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

Surf Ninjas

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I’ll be perfectly honest with you. I have never liked the Cybertruck. It looked ridiculous when it came out and there were various online articles that agreed with this at the time. Though I will grant you that there were also a lot of people on the Elon bandwagon who thought it was awesome. One of my best friends actually put down the deposit for one and he and I had a lively debate about it. It was a controversial thing from day 1. And looking back now, this might have been my first clue that Elon was headed off the deep end.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago

Yeah it’s interesting because JS is interpreted, not compiled. The proposal allows for type annotations in the syntax but no actual interpreter consequences. On the one hand that makes sense because otherwise you’re in the territory of runtime type-checking which would be a huge performance hit and would sort of defeat the purpose of static types anyway. But that means you still have to rely on your IDE or a linter for this to be useful.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The way I do it, patches are backward-compatible bug fixes. Minor versions are additional features that don’t change existing functionality. Major versions include breaking changes. I totally get that it seems crazy to bump to another major version just over a string format change. But overall the philosophy works well IMO.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (3 children)

IMO it doesn’t really matter what you said the method was for. If you change the format of a string that is returned by a method that returns a string, there’s a risk of breaking user code, even if it’s just in the context of their dev environment.

Philosophically, whether or not the behavior of your API has changed is completely disconnected from whether or not others are using it “right”. If I can depend on a function to return a certain type of value when given certain arguments, and if it doesn’t produce other side effects, then it doesn’t matter what the docs say or what the function is named, I can use it in any context where I need that type of return value and have this type of arguments available. This type of function is just mapping data to other data. If you modify the function in such a way that the return value changes after being given the same arguments, that’s a breaking change in my book.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This sounds terrible. My daughter recently got an autism diagnosis which we’ve been able to use to help get her better accommodations in school. Would you mind clueing me in to some of this abusive therapy stuff so that I can recognize it if she ends up in a situation like that?

[–] [email protected] 18 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Maybe if the alternative to building a horse barn in 1910 was building a garage that was so expensive only like 5% of the population could afford it.

view more: next ›