IIIIIIIIIIII

> The challenge is to have the right reactions when you are sitting in a comfortable office and the moral dilemmas inherent in your work are entirely hidden by metrics, and all your bosses ask you to do is to drive the graph up and to the right.

And that is where I refer back to my comment: Pretty much nobody will become the whistleblower or the guy who prevents their company (or their country) from landing that billion dollar arms sale or from raising drug prices to levels unaffordable to many sick people even if they are perfectly well aware of how bad it is. There is one Snowden outlier for a million other people. "If I don't do it somebody else will" is just one of numerous rationalizations (and it even is actually correct).

Statistically speaking the impact of ethics education vs. incentives is like 1 : 1 billion or worse.

Whenever a police officer beats someone up of shoots an unarmed guy there quickly are the "they need more training" comments. Pretty much all of these stories including the one here is about basic decency, not about complex matters, and that is what I address. You can always invent some complex outlandish scenario, but this isn't what this is about right here.

As I said to somebody else's weird reply:

The question is, why do you invent stuff I didn't say? Is this show you get your highs? People like you are one of the major annoyances of online discussion.

I didn't say anything about my childhood. Stop making stuff up, troll.

> Why is thinking and responding rationally a bad thing?

The question is, why do you invent stuff I didn't say? Is this show you get your highs? People like you are one of the major annoyances of online discussion.

I repeat:

> The idea that doctors ... are somehow immune to those effects defies logic.

That claim was never made by OP.

It doesn't matter that you responded with "evidence" to a claim you yourself made-up. Just stick to the topic and don't invent stuff.

It doesn't matter how many ethics courses are offered and taken.

The only thing I ever retweeted on my otherwise completely empty and unused Twitter account so that I could copy and paste it when needed:

"For evil to triumph, all that is required is for good men to respond rationally to incentives."

You learn all your basic ethics during early childhood, not in university courses. Most of the rest is the quote above. University classes talk to and train parts of the brain whose involvement in the ethics of your decisions is minimal.

No, same problem here with latest Chrome on Windows 10.

> With timeEnd I get the number I want but would like to see a "safe" approved way of where to place the timeend while dealing with async/promises/recursion separately and together.

Measuring asynchronous code? You are not measuring your code. Your code is only the synchronous parts, the time spent in asynchronous parts are "environmental factors". Your code doesn't run during those times, it sits in the event loop waiting for an event so that it can continue.

Why exactly was my reply downvote-worthy guys?

Yes I know asking for an explanation causes a lot more nasty voting. This is ridiculous, the site is getting more and more like reddit, and I blame the site's maintainers: There are soooo many things that could be done for a more civilized discussion culture. Like making votes public, meta-voting, requiring explanations for downvotes, a very small downvote pool (e.g. no more than three downvotes per day), etc.

How about somebody would tell me what exactly is missing from those tools I linked to, or what is supposed to be wrong that I wrote? It's not like I insulted anyone. The guy I responded to had a lot less substance in his (short) comments. "It's very superficial" - what is superficial? What is missing? Also, "all I want are two numbers at the end of the process. How long did this take and how much memory did this take." -- well, he gets those number with the DevTools! So what exactly is the complaint? For someone with a question he doesn't seem to try very hard to get an answer. Then someone downvotes posts that try to get more out of him.

It also is reasonable to know about cache misses so that you can do something about that if you decide that's possible. Do you think because it is not always valuable information, maybe even rarely (when you average over all programmers worldwide, most of whom do web stuff) that it never is, for anyone ever?

This is a gross misrepresentation of the article. It is in your own head that he solely focuses on this one thing. When somebody says "this soup needs more salt" you start talking about how there always is too much salt in processed food these days? The article is a about a concrete narrow subject, not about "performance" (the entire field).

Can't some people read an article without extrapolating to the end of the known universe and just stick to just the article's actual narrow subject?

Which is mentioned in the article (which few people fully read of course)!

See under "Other reasons CPU Utilization is misleading"

> Spin locks: the CPU is utilized, and has high IPC, but the app is not making logical forward progress.