elmerland

I agree with you! It's a shock to the system for a lot of folks to have their code base used that way. FOSS is often a labor of love by very smart folks. If it's legal (and the license allows for it), then it's fair game and hard/impossible to stop.

Commitment to the bit is the only way. None of that “I like it ironically” bs here

I dare you to

This site is for the lolz and obviously following the style set by the previous mf websites. I find it cathartic to laugh at the ridiculousness of the situation we are in, but also genuinely engage with the neck breaking pace of change we are all having to adjust to.

And the LLM came up with some really funny lines

Ya, it’s Claude

There are a few bangers in there

It sounds nice in theory, and maybe you could make it work. But in reality, distracting a developer from whatever they were doing has a cost. Add up ten 1 minute fixes and your whole day goes by.

From the customer's perspective though having a fix out in a couple of minutes is the golden standard. I guess that's were team organization and planning comes into play. Having a couple of dedicated resources to address these ad hoc issues, without distracting the people working on larger projects.

I'm confused about this article. On the one side I agree with his point on constant and timely feedback. On the other side I disagree with his dismissal of yearly reviews and weekly meetings.

You need these more formal environments to quantify the performance over a longer period of time. In doing so you can correct for biases, and get feedback not just from the manager but from everyone you work with. Additionally you can aggregate the data company wide to see patterns and hopefully try something new. I'm sure plenty of people do it wrong and that might be a different conversation.

Maybe what the performance improvement was missing was a human touch. Giving feedback without caring for the person can feel cold and calculating.

Why would they make less money by moving to a streaming model? I would imagine more people would go and buy just that instead of getting a cable package. They can also start charging a reasonable amount based on what it costs to produce the content.

If right now they rely on people paying for the channel but not watching it. Wouldn't switching to a streaming model mean that advertisers would be more interested because more people were actually watching the channel and saw ads?

I think they are talking about the more common process of leaving out the pulp and only serving the liquid.

I wonder how do cold pressed vegetable/fruit juices compare to plain fruit juice?

What is the business model for companies like these? They don't collect data like social media sites so advertisers are not as drawn to them. And moderating the groups is near impossible. What was their end goal here?