This is something I've gone through and started to think about and eventually try and help others with. Working with mulitlingual people I noticed a tendency to use negative words "disabled" instead of "enabled" which always made code have !disabled everywhere. Tried the enum approach as well; Love focused writings like this to distill a lot of information into an easy to read form. the new concept for me is the `with` as in to apply functionality by extending a `with` class (this is inside an angular project). Also using types for values so when passing a value in for methods you don't get a blank true/false you get a human readable thing which is useful for debugging and building. Only care about optimizations later if it will ever matter.
In Canada you can't call yourself an engineer unless you have some kind of association behind it; the title holds meaning including partially accountability. Something that is lacking in the tech world. I'm not saying I want to live in that world but also I worked hard for the knowledge I have starting in the IE days of web dev; it was hard earned experience making things work across the web without loosing performance. The idea that we have developers out there now getting paid higher than me that are clueless on how auth works, how the browser works, why css and browsers maintain backwards comparability for a reason.. well it's sad; but good for them I guess?
The behaviours of developers as well being beholden to their managers rather than the craft; meaning not saying No we will not move forward without proper unit tests, or pushing back when business demands quick corner cutting solutions.
Anyway, decades of bitterness. I wish we had associations to uphold some level of accountability on developers as much as protect developers. I think things would be a lot more expensive and slow if we did that though.
Fundamentally I agree with your take, not just on dev side but just the web/dev/produce' a culture of not giving a shit.
Always be a doubled edged sword, why would a startup with an optional product like a fitness tracking app ever rise to level of regulation that requires developers that are beholden to associations to uphold some level of accountability on developers.
A lot of products don’t come close to rising to the level of a government website, industrial control systems, financial transactions, etc. in terms of needing structure accountability.
Not at all. Pretending we’re so hyper focused on whether it’s AI that we’re mislabelling good writing as bad. And using abusive language. Marginally better than pretending everyone can’t read, I suppose.
Yeah, agree, ignoring would have been a much better response from my side, now in after-hand. I'm glad I said what I said though, although not sure where the "abusive" language comes from.
I appreciate the way this information is brought up and the points being made. I feel it brings a context to the Bills conversation that's hard to touch on. It makes it easier to understand on a social/technical level that's challenging. It's easy to shrug off "loosing privacy is bad, but bad guys are bad too" argument.
Yeah, the privacy aspect is definitely an important aspect of the conversation but I find it’s very easy to brush off.
I think explicitly pointing out the contradiction between the government saying that we need to boost our digital sovereignty while at the same time working to weaken the very foundation digital sovereignty is built in is an aspect we don’t really talk about and is much harder to just brush off under the guise of “we need to stop criminals”.
Pedantic comment: There is no such thing as an Apple iWatch; they finally did it right and named a product without `i` in front. Just Apple Watch. My guess is the level of detail the "signals" can be seen is what matters. Apple Watch is good for some things but its not constant its only checking in from time to time to get a reading. Purpose built device probably has higher details (faster polling or something) than a small thing on your wrist.
