People not used to AI have blind spots that prevent them from seing evident use case like this.
I'm always surprised at the amazed look of my friends when they see me concretely use the tool. They just didn't picture it until they saw it in action.
It's not even people not used to AI, I developed a tool that uses AI to do something, and then kind of couldn't be bothered to fix some of the output manually. It only occurred to me days later that I can ask the AI to fix it.
On HN, hundreds of devs worked for FAANGS and this includes working on all the projects we also claim are immoral.
If you start discussing this topic here, you will get a wall of people defending their position and a ton of downvotes, but the bottom line is, they are like the politicians or CEO they blame: if the money is good enough, morality is flexible.
No amount of BS in their beautifully worded code of conduct will change that.
You can focus on multiple things, you know. There is some low-hanging fruit in Python for performance in certain circumstances (mostly hot loops, at least, in my experiments). For example, if you need to extract a string from a datetime object, doing so manually with f-strings is about 20% faster than strftime. If you use the string mini-format language instead, it’s 40% faster.
What you’re describing is myopia. Focusing purely on performance at the expense of anything else would probably result in highly unreadable code, yes. Being aware of and caring about performance, and choosing to prioritize it when reasonable is not the same thing.
You can, but each added focus degrades the quality of the others.
The key principle is thinking with a mindset of cost.
Even if it’s low hanging fruit, there’s a world of difference between assuming we can work it in, and saying, “this is what it will cost, and this is what we won’t work on result”.
And similarly, saying ”that’s impossible” is not in the same universe as “the cost is extremely high and it’s not important enough to us to pay that cost”.
IME from the perspective of an SRE / DBRE, performance is nearly always given up (if it’s ever even considered) in favor of making things easier, and this tends to have large consequences later on.
People seem to have taken the quote, “premature optimization is the root of all evil” to mean “don’t focus on performance until you absolutely have to,” but when you push them to prove that they don’t have to, they often haven’t even profiled their code! Cloud compute – and especially K8s – has made it such that it’s expected that you simply over-provision and scale as necessary to get the throughput you need. I don’t personally see running through a profiler (ideally as part of CI) as being particularly difficult or onerous.
For having worked 30 years to get out of the socially inept zone, and given plenty of people consume known carcinogens willingly, I think this statement is a bit simplistic at best.
Smokers know they should stop smoking but it's hard to do so. Yet the path is clear.
If you are socially blind by nature, the path is really not clear and you are going to suffer from your ignorance while painfully battling to get out of a hole you can't see but feels very much is trapping you.
You probably don't need to compel them. PRISM have shown it's easy to setup a program where they are forced to just share everything through a back door to the gov and not tell anyone.
I regularly receive DMCA outside of America, which I wished I could reply to "your law doesn't apply to me, cite the right one in my jurisdiction or get lost".
But I can't.
Because my hosting will process those by default and shut my sites down unless I just comply to the take down, no matter how legitimate it is.
It can be even a bogus take down from a US point of view, or even a take down for a non existing content.
Doesn't matter. I have to show that I comply, or 48h later, my server is shut down.
Check the terms of service and the acceptable use policy of your host; even if the DMCA doesn't apply to you directly, it would apply to a U.S. based host, and you agreed to their terms when you became their customer.
You're aware hosting companies can have locations in multiple countries but still be controlled by a parent company in the US? So if the US parent company doesn't play ball, that has the potential for downstream issues in the other hosting locations. Easier/safer as the company to just play ball. If you're so concerned about this, find a host based and run solely from a safe country and not controlled by a US-based entity.
Your hosting company is bound by US laws. Their defense for hosting illegal content is the DMCA, which allows them to claim that it is your responsibility (the end-user's).
This is the entire point of DMCA: exempt service providers from indirect liability for content on their network (at the cost of taking action for that content upon receiving notice).
If DMCA applied to them but not to you, how could that possibly work? A US company could host content that no one is responsible for?
In other words: this is not about you but about your hosting company. They are the ones the DMCA apply to, and was written for. This is true no matter where you live, if your hosting company is US.
You think it's reasonable for companies worldwide to be bound by US law? Companies doing business in the US, sure, but random hosting companies? Do you also expect US companies to honor takedown requests according to North Korean law?
If your hosting provider is in the EU, the Digital Services Act shields them from liability for hosting illegal content, provided they respond swiftly to takedowns, which is why they do.
The DMCA is the United States implementation of the World Intellectual Property Organizations treaties. So there likely is an equivalent statute in your jurisdiction.
It doesn't matter. DMCA is an implementation of the IP protection (and a very biased one). While the treaties might agree on the principles, fortunately most other countries don't have an equivalent mechanism. "Yet.", a pessimist would add.
Is this actually true? I was under the impression that the DMCA came first and then similar stuff was put into WIPO treatries but not necessarily ratified or fully implemented in the domestic copyright law of other countries.
Not really sure what the point of this comment is to be honest. Other jurisdictions didn’t simply copy and paste the DMCA. OP’s desire to be threatened in terms of the regulations that they’re actually beholden to is completely valid. Because, spoiler alert, international treaties aside, not every implementation is as terrible as the DMCA.
