alexcosan

8 ms·

1.
by alexcosan 2y ago
On the same note, the implementation of Stuff in Ruby is not very ruby-like. It could have just used `.each` on the `@a_list` (in that case, you just delegate the implementation to `@a_list`, no reason to use a for-loop.
2.
by alexcosan 4y ago
This is deviating too much from the original topic, but: 1) Your initial comment just took a bash at the author about being joyful regarding some topic - "what's there to be joyful", which is really a subjective matter; 2) I&
3.
by alexcosan 4y ago
It's not really up to you to decide what brings joy to the author. You can write a similar essay, who said you couldn't? What point are you trying to make? If it's something you feel strong about, all power to you. This kind
4.
by alexcosan 4y ago
I would be curious to understand what frameworks people tend to use on top of nodejs (or even react). I have not found a standard devise-like way of implementing authentication in nodejs. The usual recommendation I come across is to develop
5.
by alexcosan 4y ago
I'm very confident the whole comment by OP is of sarcastic nature
6.
by alexcosan 4y ago
My take is that there's many unnecessary complexities (at least in many cases), where using an old, battle tested, "boring" technology suffice. The graph just seems to be an illustration of that, but it focus on storage (ther
7.
by alexcosan 4y ago
For some reason, you keep presenting arguments as if I have taken any sides. I don't agree with arguments even if I would agree with the end result. I disagree that comparing Copilot with Pirate Bay is a good argument to make your case
8.
by alexcosan 4y ago
I did not argue against that, I was talking about the argument. I don't think it's a straight comparison or even one that holds water. I don't think the parent comment mentioned licenses at all. I clearly mentioned that you c
9.
by alexcosan 4y ago
I believe that's a bit of a strawman comparison. Not taking any sides, but in your example, the resulting system would be the same - artwork aside - you would end up with the same set of algorithms put together to create the exact same
10.
by alexcosan 4y ago
I think, in theory, it would work regardless of the starting address. As long as you don't try to access the invalid address (which you wouldn't assuming that it's starting in the index 1, you would always be accessing the fi
11.
by alexcosan 4y ago
Nice work on getting this out. I think it looks pretty neat and simple to use. I’ve had some issues when using it though: - on mobile, moving the cursor in a calculation doesn’t work very well; - More important, multiplying “200 * 10%” resu
12.
by alexcosan 4y ago
This could work - similar to what happens in some bluetooth pairing flows. But you could still send a text message with a phishing link under the same Sender ID and fool someone into opening it. You'd really need to know that the spec
13.
by alexcosan 5y ago
I see this more as "do not assume until there's evidence of malice". Not that you should not look for evidence - basically, innocent until proven guilty. There's a tendency to judge every ignorant act as malice when, a l