Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | fao_'s commentslogin

Yeah! It's not like code quality matters in terms of negative value or lives lost, right?!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizon_IT_scandal

Furthermore,

> As for the artifact that Tan was building with such frenetic energy, I was broadly ignoring it. Polish software engineer Gregorein, however, took it apart, and the results are at once predictable, hilarious and instructive: A single load of Tan’s "newsletter-blog-thingy" included multiple test harnesses (!), the Hello World Rails app (?!), a stowaway text editor, and then eight different variants of the same logo — one of which with zero bytes.

Do you think any of the... /things/ bundled in this software increased the surface area that attacks could be leveraged against?


I also struggle with this all the time, balance between bringing value/joy and level of craft. Most human written stuff might look really ugly or was written in a weird way but as long as it’s useful it’s ok.

What I don’t like here is the bragging about the LoC. He’s not bragging about the value it could provide. Yes people also write shitty code but they don’t brag about it - most of the time they are even ashamed.


> a stowaway text editor

?!

Was it hiding in one of the lifeboats?


The Horizon IT scandal was not caused by poor code quality, the scandal was the corrupt employees of the UK government/Post Office. Poor quality code might have caused the error, but the failure to investigate the errors and sweep them under the rug was made by humans.

> Poor quality code might have caused the error, but the failure to investigate the errors and sweep them under the rug was made by humans.

That's not quite correct.

The root set of errors were made by the accounting software. The branch sets of errors were made by humans taking Horizon IT's word for it that there was no fault in the code, and instead blaming the workers for the differences in the balance sheets.

If there were no errors in the accounting software (i.e. it had been properly designed and tested), then none of that would have happened.

Nobody blames THERAC-25 on the human operator.


It was worse than that. Higher ups in the post office knew the system was buggy and still doubled down on it. Yes, if the accounting software wasn't terrible the whole issue would not have happened, but there were so, so, many chances for the post office to do the right thing afterwards that it's not at all fair to blame the results on the poor quality software, which very notably did not prosecute thousands of people for fraud while telling each of them they were the only ones being flagged by the system.

(THERAC-25 was a little more towards 'just bad software', but there were still systemic failures there as well).


> included multiple test harnesses (!)

ive seen plenty of real code written by real people with multiple test harnesses and multiple mocking libraries.

its still kinda irrelevant to whether the code does anything useful; only a descriptor of the funding model


If I'm reading this correctly ("a single homepage load of http://garryslist.org downloads 6.42 MB across 169 requests"), the test harnesses were being downloaded by end users. They weren't being installed as devDependencies.

> The catch: the shell normally puts the terminal in *cooked mode,*

Yeah, that's not the name of the mode. In this sense, it's "canonical mode". Description reads like AI slop where technical content was reformatted into marketing/PRspeak. It feels like a 30 year old PR representative desperately trying to twist any kind of technical language specifically to pander to the AAVE-derived slang of the younger set of internet-addled minds.

As a result, this does not interest me.

For anyone who is interested in ANSI terminal stuff, or building their own, Lexi Hale had a decent article on this: https://xn--rpa.cc/irl/term.html which got discussion here about eight years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24436860


Except it’s actually called “cooked mode” [1] and predates the use of the slang.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_mode https://www.linusakesson.net/programming/tty/


"cooked mode" refers to physical teletypes, though. In the POSIX spec[1] it's called "canonical mode", same for the other specifications (if they're mentioned at all, I don't think the ANSI specification mentions either term).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/POSIX_terminal_interface#Canon...


Thank you for this correction. I'll update the readme!

Top comment on the previous thread was someone complaining about the writing style of kids these days. Huh.

> but that means losing the semi-anarchist bazaar mentality.

The places you mention are already receiving huge doses of industry funding funnelled through the Linux Foundation. Honestly, it looks like the standard is going to be KDE. Even microsoft is copying it for their next DE: https://www.webpronews.com/microsoft-windows-ripping-off-kde...


some people are very bad at reading, I see

Ok but the license fees are, what, 50 quid? times say, 3k or 30k people? A 150k or 1.5m injection into the linux ecosystem to develop those would pay for a _lot_ of developers and a _lot_ of developer time.

From what I heard about NGI-zero, another government sponsorship project (1), the problem so far is primarily finding the projects that need sponsorship.

(1) https://nlnet.nl/NGI0/


That doesn't seem correct. Almost all of the projects installed on a standard Linux distro need funding. I just stopped applying to NLnet after getting nothing but rejections.

doesn’t really feel like that much tbh

> I really wonder how some people think of themselves as artists while simultaneously attacking another persons choice of self expression.

Because AI art is not art, and rips off existing artwork in a way that is more than learning from the style and imitating.


Why do you get to proclaim what is and isn't art? It is a topic that has been debated for millennia.

Almost every respected art form today was birthed to cries of "That is not art"


I was raised by two artists who are top of their field and have taught art professionally in multiple ways and mediums. I have done art myself. That makes me more qualified than most people here, and also 99% of the people who are writing AI slop.

Did you mean to comment this on the NME sibling? Haha


If someone couldn't be bothered to write it, I certainly can't be bothered to read it. I did not bother to read the article involved because the continual piss stain on the images, the website itself, and a few key phrases let me on to the fact that it was all generated.

When you interact with art, you do so to interact with the author and the point they want to make. Writing is something where a skilled writer will be able to make a point tersely and have it stick, knowing where to embellish and where to keep it simple. Every decision in art tells you about the artist. Generative AI may be able to fake the composition process, but the point of composition is it reveals something about the human. All of those are artistic decisions that a machine apparently now "can do", but not with any coherency.

The holder of the reigns of slop is not an artist, this is plain to see because they do not interact or engage with their work on the same level as an artist. The produced slop is not art, because it cannot be engaged with on the same level.


> So, once again, the old question: If reducing jobs is the only goal, but people are also expected to have jobs to be able to pay for food and housing, what is the end goal here? What is the vision that those companies are trying to realize?

Capitalism is reliant on the underclass (the homeless, the below minimum-wage) to add pressure to the broader class of workers in a way that makes them take jobs that they ordinarily wouldn't (Because they may be e.g. physically/emotionally unsafe, unethical, demeaning), for less money than they deserve and for more hours than they should. This is done in order to ensure that the price of work for companies is low, and that they can always draw upon a needy desperate workforce if required. You either comply with company requirements, or you get fired and hope you have enough runway not to starve. This was written about over a hundred years ago and it's especially true today in the modern form of it. Programmers as a field have just been materially insulated from the modern realities of "your job is timing your bathroom breaks, tracking how many hours you spend looking at the internet, your boss verbally abuses you for being slow, and you aren't making enough money to eat properly".

This is also why many places do de-facto 'cleansings' of homeless people by exterminating their shelter or removing their ability to survive off donations, and why the support that is given for people without the means to survive is not only tedious but almost impossible to get. The majority of workers are supposed to look at that and go "well fuck, glad that's not me!" with a little part of their brain going "if i lost my job and things went badly, that could become me."

This is also why immigration enforcement is a thing — so many modern jobs that nobody else in the western world wants to do are taken by immigrants. The employer won't look too closely at the visa, and in return the person gets work. With the benefit being towards the employer — if the person refuses to do something dangerous to themselves or others, or refuses to produce enough output to sustain the exponential growth at great personal cost, well, then the company can just cut the immigrant loose with no recourse, or outright call the authorities on them so they get deported. Significantly less risky to get people to work in intolerable conditions for illegal wages if there is no hope of them suing you for this.

Back in the 1900s there were international conventions to remove passports. Now? Well, they're a convenient underclass for political manoeuvring. Why would you want people to have freedom of movement if your own citizens could just leave when things get bad, and when the benefits are a free workforce that you don't have to obey workers rights laws about?


> (TBF, BT ones also drop packets in RF-noisy environments, but they seem to be more resistant to it)

I've experienced the opposite. The microwave will knock out my bluetooth completely, but the wired headphones are solid but in a decade of using both wired and wireless headphones I've never heard anything weird or staticy through the wired ones. My wired headphones were the Shure SE215, and now after a decade of using those they broke, so I have the Kiwi Ears Belle.


Your microwave is leaky, and/or not grounded, but since you don't experience static, I assume you have grounding at your house. Without grounding static and mains hum is quite noticeable. Try touching the body of your pc and listen how silence changes in wired headphones.


> but since you don't experience static, I assume you have grounding at your house.

It's illegal not to,


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: