platypus_plumba

"Your tree?" — Racoon, probably

My expectation is that this is something core that programmers should be aware of all the time. Forgetting about this is like forgetting what an interface is. It's at the core of what we do. At least I think so, maybe I'm wrong assuming this is something every programmer should be aware of all the time.

Do we really need a video about this in 2024? Shouldn't this be already a core part of our education as software engineers?

The title of the post is "how to avoid if-else hell", not "how to avoid conditionals". Not sure what's your point.

So you probably have to go and fix it now. Good luck.

It's a joke..... Before I'm sentenced to death by downvotes.

Learning how Systemd manages the network was a total mindfuck. There are so many alternatives, all of them being used differently by different tools, partially supported. networkd, Network Manager... There were other tools, they shared similar files but had them in different /etc or /usr folders. There were unexpected interactions between the tools... Oh man, it was so bad. I was very disappointed.

I was really into learning how things really worked in Linux and this was a slap to my face because my mindset was "Linux is so straightforward". No, it is not, it is actually a mess like most systems. I know this isn't a "Linux" issue, I'm just ranting about this specific ecosystem.

It means jews a sassy

And yet, the worst design choice was how this meme template was used.

I honestly don't get why everyone is agreeing with Windows on this one. I just love how explicit Linux is.

file.txt is fucking file.txt. Don't do any type extra magic. Do exactly as I'm saying. If I say "open file.txt", it is "open file.txt", not "open File.txt".

The feature isn't being able to create filenames with the same name, nobody does that. The feature is how explicit it is.

It would be so confusing to read some code trying to access FILE.TXT and then find the filesystem has file.txt

The moment you finally install arch and your realize you still feel empty inside.

The same people who didn't understand that Google uses a SEO algorithm to promote sites regardless of the accuracy of their content, so they would trust the first page.

If people don't understand the tools they are using and don't double check the information from single sources, I think it's kinda on them. I have a dietician friend, and I usually get back to him after doing my "Google research" for my diets... so much misinformation, even without an AI overview. Search engines are just best effort sources of information. Anyone using Google for anything of actual importance is using the wrong tool, it isn't a scholar or research search engine.

It really depends on the type of information that you are looking for. Anyone who understands how LLMs work, will understand when they'll get a good overview.

I usually see the results as quick summaries from an untrusted source. Even if they aren't exact, they can help me get perspective. Then I know what information to verify if something relevant was pointed out in the summary.

Today I searched something like "Are owls endangered?". I knew I was about to get a great overview because it's a simple question. After getting the summary, I just went into some pages and confirmed what the summary said. The summary helped me know what to look for even if I didn't trust it.

It has improved my search experience... But I do understand that people would prefer if it was 100% accurate because it is a search engine. If you refuse to tolerate innacurate results or you feel your search experience is worse, you can just disable it. Nobody is forcing you to keep it.