- zo1If you think these things are just using a "dumb" search query, and using the top 5 hits, you're in for a lot of surprises very soon.
- Yes, but only after fracturing the ecosystem even further unfortunately.
- I would imagine because women are under-represented in this field, so naturally we have to weight gender over qualifications. It's just the way things are. I wish it wasn't and qualifications/ability played a 100% part in these decisions.
- We're nearly-there. The humans then become the capital/resource to be acquired, not money.
That's why every country is somehow chasing that elusive "population growth". It creates more "things" to own, whether that be money by virtue of more people creating more money through economic activity or simply more people to claim as "yours" (for the elites/leaders).
- Sounds to be more of a symptom of the types of programs and functions you have written, rather than something inherent about types or Python. I've never encountered the type of gerry-mangled scenario you have described no matter how throwaway the code is.
- That is exactly what Democracy is. The only difference is people that are now complaining have, up until recently, actually been "the wolves", and now that they're outnumbered on certain topics and country-wide decisions they complain about the concept itself.
How do you think the people on the other side have felt till now?
The checks and balances only acted as a way to hide the true nature of government.
- Judging by what I've been seeing in the field in the last half-decade, this doesn't surprise me one bit. Zero forward thinking and comprehensive analysis of features before they are built, with tickets just being churned out by incessant meetings that only end because people get tired. And the devs just finish the tickets without ever asking why a feature is being built or how it actually has to interact with the rest of the system.
Multiply that by years, by changing project managers and endless UX re-writes, huge push for DEI over merit, junior & outsourced-heavy hires and forced promotions, and you end up getting this mess that is "technically" working and correct but no one can quantify the potential loss and lack of real progress that could have been made if actual competent individuals were put in charge.
- It was bad enough that we had to tell developers to trust some rando website to download a tool that we'd use to potentially plug in sensitive production usernames + credentials.
A link that looks like this:
https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/putty/latest.ht...
And now they've gone and made it worse by posting some new site and confirming the new link is real on their weird "hachyderm" social media post thing. Yeah, talk about a grey-beard get-off-my-lawn developer screaming at the wind and wanting to make it worse for themselves and their "brand".
- This seems similar to the Notepad++ team using their platform to promote political viewpoints.
The same thing happened with Facebook "pages", when they became a personal "soap box" by the owner of the page. It was downhill from there... You might as well turn the whole web into FB/Twitter/X/Insta promotional spam at that point.
- We should coin a new term: "Straight to Netflix"
- 100% my mistake. Guess my European geographic knowledge is lacking there, oops.
- My comment may come off that way, but I don't think there is a perfect equivalence, no. And if anything, every person has a different set of morality.
I come from a point of practicality and lack of chaos. It's bad enough that we all have different morality, but we have somehow through some semi-shared and semi-agreed process come up with a set of laws that we should all subscribe and be held-to. And on top of that, we have individuals that want to add more chaos to the mix by having us gimp and restrict the government from enforcing the laws we have already agreed to (for better or worse). They don't get to have that right anymore than I have the right to break any other arbitrary law, and I am tired of privacy advocates claiming some objective moral high ground and "universal" principle of privacy that they claim we all share or want.
- I think that's a great idea. I for one want to enable our governments to track down criminals and punish them for it. If they're not doing everything they can do so in this technological and digital age, then they are breaking their part of that pesky "social contract" I am being upheld to.
And to people like you that oppose this and propose even more authoritarian laws that prevent me as a citizen from protecting myself: You don't speak for all of us.
- Except he's right. If you haven't noticed how crappy "AI" search is in Outlook and Teams then you probably don't use them. Even when it sorta works, it literally ignores search terms you put in the field, it gives you the search results first for what it thinks you want, then after that it gives you the actual results which are at least somehow using your search terms.
At this point they'd be better off throwing my entire inbox in a RAG workflow written by some junior halfway across the world. It's that bad. I find stuff quicker by remembering when I got an email and then scanning it myself with my own eyeballs and my finger on the scroll wheel.
Outlook used to be amazing. It used to be the hub to my work knowledge base and my memory. Now it's just the tool that does my emails mostly very well.
- As someone that has done a lot of projects for "the government" in the last 2 decades, it's unfortunately the case that all government departments and projects don't run well and are doomed to fail (funding or not). The nature of the constraints and priorities given to the governmental agencies (like the DMV example above) is one that makes them fail or not do well. It's by design, coupled with all political parties treating government projects as glorified jobs-programs, and you end up getting a downward cycle that both sides feed on.
Then you get misguided attempts at "bringing in the private sector" like allowing DMV functions to be done by private entities, at their premises or through their apps. This is literally the worst of both worlds even if it works and technically isn't really "gutting" the governmental department.
- The problem with that small tidbit is that it immediately sets your type system to go down the path of Java and Typescript (which we all mock for it's crazy type systems and examples such as IImplementsFactoryAbstractMethodThingVirtual classes). This is not the python way, and is frankly part of its secret sauce (if you ask me).
And yes I include Typescript with Java there because it has it's own version of the Java class ecosystem hell, we just don't notice it yet. Look at any typescript library that's reasonably complicated and try to deduce what some of those input types actually do or mean - be honest. Heck a few weeks back someone posted how they solved a complicated combinatorial problem using Typescripts type system alone.
- It's a tough answer because we have had years of artificially-pumped support and development and ecosystem growth of Pydantic.
But if I had to roll the clock back I'd recommend marshmallow and that entire ecosystem. It's definitely way less bloated than Pydantic currently, and only lacks some features. Beyond that, just use plain-old dataclasses.
- Wow really I had no idea. This rabbit hole goes deeper then I expected!
In 2022, the project evolved into a commercial entity called Pydantic Services Inc., founded by Samuel Colvin and Adrian Garcia Badaracco, to build products around the open-source library. The company raised $4.7 million in seed funding in February 2023, led by Sequoia Capital, with participation from Partech, Irregular Expressions, and other investors. This was followed by a $12.5 million Series A round in October 2024, again led by Sequoia Capital and including Partech Partners, bringing the total funding to approximately $17.2 million across rounds. The Series A funding coincided with the launch of Pydantic Logfire, a commercial observability platform for backend applications, aimed at expanding beyond the core open-source validation framework. As of mid-2025, no additional funding rounds have been publicly reported.
https://techcrunch.com/2023/02/16/sequoia-backs-open-source-...