Using AI as a tool like any other is fine. It’s the blind trust that it can do everything for you that is problematic (not to mention the fact people hide the fact that something “they created” is AI). Just like with any other computer system: garbage in, garbage out.

Color me curmudgeon, but automated dependency updates should never be a consideration.

Also, one thing I do like that Github does is that it can be configured to send you a report of dependency changes (in yarn, for example).

When I see these generation-hating comments — specifically older generations hating on something the younger generations do — I can’t help but think about whose fault it is for whatever slight the older generation feels.

Who created digital clocks? Who created iPads and iPhones? Who created video games? Every single generation has their own slang that each previous generation fails to understand (not because it doesn’t make sense, but because the previous generations are too lazy and/or stubborn to learn).

/soapbox

Thank you for confirming what I said. 😊

This may or may not help, but here’s my two cents:

Windows was originally built to be as user-friendly as possible because its target audience are non-tech-savvy people. It then evolved into being a business OS. So security was never its first priority.

UNIX was built for tech savvy people to do business-sensitive stuff, and required sophisticated security models. Linux was modeled after UNIX (Minix specifically), and thus inherited those same principles. It evolved to become more user friendly. But security remained a priority.

Now, that said, both Windows and Linux are configurable. You can make Windows more secure with effort, just like you can make Linux less secure with effort (and I don’t mean simply using root all the time).

There are diehards on both sides , and they will make excellent (or terrible) arguments for their favored OS. So you need to decide what works best for you and your use case and go with that. 😊

I put my ticket numbers in my tickets, but i also try to describe the change too (e.g. “Fix bug where xyz happens due to zyx action”). Also, atomic commits: commit only related changes.

Yes, it takes longer to commit large changes, BUT you can easily merge the commits, and rollback only what needs to be rolled back.

Git commits with message saying “pushing changes” and there are over 50 files with unrelated code in it.

Ive used it when I’ve found myself completely stumped with a problem, and I don’t know exactly how to search for the solution. I’m building a macOS app, and unfortunately a lot of the search results are for iOS — even if I exclude iOS from the results (e.g. how to build a window with tabs (like safari tabs), but all results comes up for iOS’ TabView).

My conspiracy theory is that AI is already running our tech companies, and that’s why everyone and their brother is pushing hard for AI integration, despite everyone knowing AI is nowhere near ready for public consumption.

So is /dev/null.

If you have an evening (or all weekend), and really want to blow your mind, look up Low Byte Productions on YouTube and look up their JavaScript videos.

Here’s how I approach old and slow:

1. Older software is mature and battle tested. It’s been around long enough that the developers should know what they’re doing, and have built a strong community for help and support.
2. Slow is okay when it comes to accuracy. Would I love to back up my gigabytes (peanuts compared to some of you folks out there with data centers in your attics) in seconds? Yes. But more importantly, I’d rather have my data be valid for if I ever need to do any kind of restore. And I’ve been around the block enough times in my career to see many useless backups.

I believe it was more because in database terminology there were masters and slaves for replication. Version control came under fire soon after.

So I’m clear, are you referring to the @layer CSS at-rule? Or, something else?

You’re absolutely right. My idea is to imply that developers should give their semantics actual thought and intention.

For your example, the X button can be called .dismiss, since typically that’s what clicking the X does; whereas cancelling something may have more meaning (e.g. cancelling a subscription, which triggers other actions aside of dismissing a modal window).

I imagine the better argument (in my opinion) would be to not use generic names such as btn, as they are redundant and offer little self-documentation of their use.

Instead, I believe a combination of selectors and classes would be more meaningful, and encourage readability. For this particular scenario, I would go with a button selector to give all <button> tags a consistent basic styling, and use aptly-named classes like .cancel, .primary, and .destructive to add more styling for specific button purposes.

Then if I need to find all Cancel buttons, I can use a button.cancel query selector and only get Cancel buttons.

Learn CSS layers, use CSS layers.

What are CSS layers? I’m legitimately curious.

I once interviewed at a company that bragged about not using version control or FTP, and how everyone made their changes in production.

~I’m so very glad I didn’t get that job.~

Donkey Shame!

I do understand what blockchains are; my question is more to whether they are used outside of cryptocurrencies or not.

~I do also like your explanation.~