> just make a choice, run the linter automatically and be done with it.
Most people probably do this. These types of discussions (probably) come up when someone else made the choice and other people also need to adhere to this choice. This is important for teams, but sometimes big egos don't want these choices made for them.
> Attentive CS graduates have a structured pool of information to draw from
Yes, but a self-taught Developer also has their own pool of information to draw from. That could be prior experience, but it can also overlap with the CS graduates' pool of information.
You don't need to take a DSA class to learn DSA. There is a wealth of information out there for self-taught developers to learn these kinds of things. From textbooks to YouTube videos, it is all readily available for anyone.
Self-taught does not mean you need to invent everything from first principles.
> Self-taught does not mean you need to invent everything from first principles.
It does imply lack of access to formal resources, though. Learning from a textbook or an educationally-minded Youtube channel is no more self-taught than sitting through a lecture in college.
It is ultimately a distinction without a difference. Historically, when information was siloed, there was a difference. Self-taught meant something when you couldn't look something up on a whim. But those days are long behind us.
Well... Self-taught means that the person learned by their own initiative, "without formal instruction or training".
Going to the library or buying and reading books is not formal instruction, and neither is watching Videos. There is no one to guide, help, or check on progress.
I could watch the entire MIT Intro to Algorithms Course on YouTube and still be self-taught, because watching that does not make me an MIT Student and it does not make Dr. Jason Ku my instructor.
The idea that the injustice & domination should continue because there is no clear cut solution is pure evil.
Imagine saying that South African apartheid needs to be maintained because there is no “simple” solution, or that African colonies must continue to be subjugated because the solution to the settler problem is not “simple”.
Regardless, the solution here has been regurgitated endlessly: end the blockade of Gaza, end apartheid in the West Bank, either as one state with equal rights for all, or as two states (with full sovereignty) and right of return extended to all Palestinians and not just to Jews.
> idea that the injustice & domination should continue because there is no clear cut solution is pure evil
It’s prioritisation. There are multiple horrible civil wars, rebellions and displacements happening around the world right now. Every person doesn’t need to have a position on each one; there is an argument that’s counterproductive. (Exhibit A: the Columbia protests.)
Since you brought up the Columbia protests and general dissent inside the US: how many such conflicts and genocides are directly backed and propped up by the US?
Well, that’s my point. This is the only major ongoing conflict where the US and major Western powers are virtually unconditionally backing the “bad guys”.
So it makes sense that there would be more attention and pushback on this one versus others.
How exactly do you suggest that a country like Germany (since Germanys inaction was the topic of this thread) reach those goals? How does Germany end the blockade of Gaza? How does Germany end apartheid in the West Bank?
Just because I can’t do anything to improve the situation does not mean that I am in favour of the status quo. That does not make me evil either.
> Just because I can’t do anything to improve the situation does not mean that I am in favour of the status quo. That does not make me evil either.
It does. The Germans who stood aside when the Nazis rose to power and the soldiers just "executing orders" were as much to blame for the rise of Hitler as the ones supporting it. Not taking a side against evil is taking evil's side. And you of all peoples should have learned from your history. Genocide is bad.
> How does Germany end apartheid in the West Bank?
By applying pressure on the international community to boycott Israel. Same way Germany is applying pressure on the international community to boycott Russia.
Are you seriously asking me this question, or is this an attempt at a rhetorical? And why are we shifting the goalposts once again?
How do you think apartheid South Africa ended? How does any country pressure another?
In a supposedly democratic nation like Germany, how would citizens pressure their government to stop supporting & providing diplomatic cover for another to commit a genocide & maintain apartheid?
The idea that Isreal is occupying the west bank and or Gaza goes back to the 1967 6 day war and has jack all to do with Palestinian borders real or imaginary.
Those lands were the property of Jordan and Egypt...
Can you please stop posting flamewar comments? It's against the site guidelines because it destroys the curious conversation we're trying for. I know that topic is both important and activating, but that makes it more important, not less, to stick to the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Instead, please make your substantive points thoughtfully, regardless of how wrong someone else is or you feel they are.
Was the problem with my comment the use of profanity? I did not insult the commenter, nor did I make any ad hominem attacks.
I don’t see any rules against profanity in general, or the use of profanity to respond to an argument. I also took the time to clarify why the argument is “bullshit”. But maybe I am missing something.
How many people use software like this because they have no choice? I used Paragon NTFS, but the entire time, I thought it was ridiculous that MacOS can't read NTFS on its own.
None of those are actual German words. For some of them, I found references that these words could potentially be used in Pennsylvania, but most of these words are not even German, even when you split them into their components.
> We both guessed the censor was catching it as a false positive for the slur.
There is a word for this. It is called the Scunthorpe problem. Named after the incident in which the residents of the Town Scunthorpe could not register for an AOL account because AOL had an obscenity filter that did not allow the Town name.
It has been a problem since 1996 and still causes problems.
> I brought over the blueprints, and the technician found the schedule of beams and columns within seconds
Is that really an example of the standardization you want? It shows that the blueprint was done in a way that the technician expected it to be, but I am not sure that these blueprints are standardized in that way globally. Each country has its standards and language.
If an architect from a different country did that blueprint, I would bet that it would be significantly different from the blueprint you have.
Software Engineering doesn't have a problem with country borders, but different languages would require different standards and conventions. Unless you can convince everyone to use the same language (which would be a bad idea; CRUD apps and rocket systems have different trade-offs), I doubt there could be an industry-wide standard.
But I can't look at the design from my desk-mate and hope to understand it quickly. We wall love to invent as much as possible ourselves, and we lack a common design language for the spaces we are problem solving in. Personally I don't entirely think it's a problem of discipline of software engineering, but a reflection of the fact that the space of possible solutions is so high for software, and the [opportunity] cost of missing a great solution because it is too different from previous solutions is so high (difference between 120 seconds application start and 120 milliseconds application start, for instance).
Most people probably do this. These types of discussions (probably) come up when someone else made the choice and other people also need to adhere to this choice. This is important for teams, but sometimes big egos don't want these choices made for them.