I have a bit over twenty years with some of them spent at a site that had a million users daily. Seeing as we’re measuring dicks here.
We’re not building a space shuttle, here. Lighten up.
Come on man. It should be a mantra for web devs to never ever lose or bungle users’ data. You know, the thing that gives the web its entire worth, one person sharing with others their personal experience in overcoming the daily grind and tedium: them asking “how do you deal with this shit?” and others replying “well if you contort just so to keep your back from giving out, and press these buttons, you can in fact live to the end of the day”. This should persist on the web for years to come and for everyone to discover. But somehow you think that if you save five minutes on ruminating through your decisions, that’s worth a whole lot and everyone should cheer on you for implementing that change despite the fact that I could overwrite that reply with “you greedy schmuck need to shut up and do your miserable job because you suck”, and this is entirely okay with you.
That’s not what is going on, no. You called my work “fresh college-grad coding” and I described my experience to assure you that it is not. I made no intimations about the length of your dick, qualifications or credibility.
This is a strawman. I reject your premise that losing or bungling user’s data is at risk here.
Yes the ‘answer’ value is on the comment but the full ActivityPub representation of the comment is only under the control of the comment author in the most narrow and technical sense - only for those who have access to the underlying database of their instance (to get the private key for signing the Activity). There is no realistic scenario where this becomes a big problem. And if it does, I can spit out a new release that changes it within a day.
This is a really small part of the picture and to dig down into one boolean value in a project of 50k lines of code and use that to dismiss the whole thing is just asinine.
Oh you mean you reject the changes to which other people, more familiar than me with the piefed codebase, already voiced objections? You call this a strawman because you heard that this is the word that dismisses your opponent’s opinions? Brilliant defense there.
I reject your premise that losing or bungling user’s data is at risk here.
So you write changes into users’ data, but you reject the opinion that this might bungle users’ data because you never cared for the data’s integrity. Gewd jerb there.
And if it does, I can spit out a new release that changes it within a day.
Ah, great. Have you ever considered spitting out a ‘new release’ before this becomes a problem at all, before malicious actors can botch as many posts as they could? No? Well thank you, that’s all I wanted to know.
to dig down into one boolean value in a project of 50k lines of code and use that to dismiss the whole thing is just asinine.
Yes, thank you for confirming that you don’t really care about users’ data and you will gleefully give it up for a half-hour of your time thinking over what you’re doing.
Haha
I have 25 years of experience at this and am well aware of the tradeoffs I’m making.
We’re not building a space shuttle, here. Lighten up.
Most of the people agree with your approach. Not sure why that person is so aggressive.
I have a bit over twenty years with some of them spent at a site that had a million users daily. Seeing as we’re measuring dicks here.
Come on man. It should be a mantra for web devs to never ever lose or bungle users’ data. You know, the thing that gives the web its entire worth, one person sharing with others their personal experience in overcoming the daily grind and tedium: them asking “how do you deal with this shit?” and others replying “well if you contort just so to keep your back from giving out, and press these buttons, you can in fact live to the end of the day”. This should persist on the web for years to come and for everyone to discover. But somehow you think that if you save five minutes on ruminating through your decisions, that’s worth a whole lot and everyone should cheer on you for implementing that change despite the fact that I could overwrite that reply with “you greedy schmuck need to shut up and do your miserable job because you suck”, and this is entirely okay with you.
That’s not what is going on, no. You called my work “fresh college-grad coding” and I described my experience to assure you that it is not. I made no intimations about the length of your dick, qualifications or credibility.
Good day, sir.
Oh, so your response to the quality of your work is to cite your age. Wow, what an amazing retort.
This is a strawman. I reject your premise that losing or bungling user’s data is at risk here.
Yes the ‘answer’ value is on the comment but the full ActivityPub representation of the comment is only under the control of the comment author in the most narrow and technical sense - only for those who have access to the underlying database of their instance (to get the private key for signing the Activity). There is no realistic scenario where this becomes a big problem. And if it does, I can spit out a new release that changes it within a day.
This is a really small part of the picture and to dig down into one boolean value in a project of 50k lines of code and use that to dismiss the whole thing is just asinine.
Oh you mean you reject the changes to which other people, more familiar than me with the piefed codebase, already voiced objections? You call this a strawman because you heard that this is the word that dismisses your opponent’s opinions? Brilliant defense there.
So you write changes into users’ data, but you reject the opinion that this might bungle users’ data because you never cared for the data’s integrity. Gewd jerb there.
Ah, great. Have you ever considered spitting out a ‘new release’ before this becomes a problem at all, before malicious actors can botch as many posts as they could? No? Well thank you, that’s all I wanted to know.
Yes, thank you for confirming that you don’t really care about users’ data and you will gleefully give it up for a half-hour of your time thinking over what you’re doing.