Patrick Westerhoff

[Tom Warren @tomwarren]

Crucial is shutting down — because Micron wants to sell its RAM and SSDs to AI companies instead. It’s already getting hard to build an affordable PC, and the exit of the longstanding provider of consumer memory is going to make that even more challenging https://t.co/XXcxmb84dZ

[Patrick Westerhoff @poke]

@lesbiansquiddo @TheOrbPonderer7 @CrocutaFang I will forgive you.

[Patrick Westerhoff @poke]

@lesbiansquiddo @TheOrbPonderer7 @CrocutaFang I usually am but you didn't ask nicely 😔

[Patrick Westerhoff @poke]

@dariogriffo @vyrotek You could just target net8 in your libraries and be done with it. You can then consume them from both net8 and net10 applications. The target framework does not need to match the version you want to run it with. And you also do not need to update the target version all the time.

[Patrick Westerhoff @poke]

@Aaronontheweb What's up with those comments?!
“for us it does not matter whether it is free, paid or who maintains it, as long as it is actively maintained”
“The problem is that you're focused only on the negatives”
Wtf, let your wallet speak and support the projects you're depending on.

[Patrick Westerhoff @poke]

@eduardog3000 @nsg650 TrID has been doing this very successfully for ages… https://t.co/dtQQr3J9zF

[Patrick Westerhoff @poke]

@Aaronontheweb @chriscanal Aspire is using Blazor Server? That is actually comforting (as someone who advocates for Blazor Server for internal applications a lot)

[Patrick Westerhoff @poke]

@apxltd @Aaronontheweb So you would rather depend on free and unsustainable solutions, or on self-made replacements built by amateurs that have no intention of maintaining it for the long run, than depending on a library that has a multi-year track record and now also a plan for a sustainable future?

[Patrick Westerhoff @poke]

@apxltd @Aaronontheweb Open source libraries are used a ton in enterprise applications, in both simple situations and also very complex setups. I know multiple projects at the company I work at that used most features of MT, where they are now frantically looking for a (free) alternative…

[Patrick Westerhoff @poke]

@peen420_ @MikeCodesDotNET @Aaronontheweb And the reality often is more like “I don't want my employer to pay for this thing”

[Patrick Westerhoff @poke]

@Aaronontheweb Looking forward to seeing this person go a commercial license route in ~5 years after these forks gained any kind of relevant traction… (unrealistically assuming that they stay relevant and maintained for that long)

[The Oatmeal @Oatmeal]

I wrote a comic about AI art https://t.co/gaDDJQUeoF

[Patrick Westerhoff @poke]

@Aaronontheweb Looking at how the EF Core team is evolving, I am happy for MS not to take on new subprojects that could further jeopardize the whole ecosystem. Better focus on keeping the fundamentals alive…

[ハセン حسن @hasen_95dx]

Where do I start. OOP is not a discipline, it's a paradigm, a mode of thinking about how programming ought to be.

OOP is not primarily about data structures. Not at all. An object is mostly an abstract interface. It might have some data, or it might not. Many OOP practices encourage creating objects that only hold references to other objects and no concrete data at all.

The problem with programming is that computers can only ever move data around and perform some arithmetic operations on them. That's really all they do. Everything else is built on top of that.

Display, audio, and networking at just I/O operations, and I/O to the CPU just looks like reading/writing to and from memory.

There are levels of abstractions, and often times it's beneficial to isolate lower level concerns from higher level concerns.

You can do that just fine with good old procedures.

Sometimes, it's beneficial to have "abstract" objects that could potentially have many different implementations. A file system is the thing that comes to mind most of the time. I can read/write to files without worrying about the underlying file system. That's a good thing.

Not everything is a file system though! Not everything needs to be abstracted and hidden.

The criticism against OOP is usually around the level of granularity.

Within your own code base, you want to know how everything works. You don't want to _hide_ things from yourself.

It might be useful to limit the scope of visibility for some fields, but it's always on an "it depends" basis.

OOP wants you to make strong boundary modules on very small scales, and it comes with absolute rules to help enforce that, like always making everything private by default, and always dealing with abstract objects instead of concrete data and procedures.

When the QT below says that OO is a discipline, they mean that following the OO heuristics is always the right thing to do and it's better to just always do it and get used to doing it, and you don't get to argue about it, just like you always fasten your seat belt, always take a daily shower, always brush your teeth before bed, always go to the gym on schedule, always follow the correct diet. Don't second guess yourself every other step. Just do the right things and you will get the good results.

The problem of course is that you do not get the good results from following the OO rules because they are wrong when applied as such.

Some things can be useful all the time and you should do them even if they bother you a little bit, like fastening your seat belt.

Some things are useful some of the time but not other times, like taking the highway vs the regular road, riding the train vs calling a taxi.

The answer is always "it depends".

This is not to say that there are no heuristics.

There are, but not everyone agrees on them.

Different groups of programmers have different heuristics. Some of them overlap, some of them don't.

Some of my heuristics that I found to be immensely helpful in making programs easier to understand and reason about:

- Prefer regular data and procedures
- Prefer languages where structs have value semantics (as opposed to reference semantics)
- Zero value initialization by default

Everything else is "it depends".

How big should the file be? It depends.

How long should a function be? It depends.

How big should a module be? It depends.

[Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_]

@GergelyOrosz Because in any negotiation, you have no power at all if you're unwilling to walk away from the table.

If you have no deal-breaker, then you'll take whatever is offered, even if it's 37 cents per audiobook sale, which is, according to my calculations, what I would actually get.

[Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_]

@GergelyOrosz No one is coming to help authors. We have to help ourselves.

And that means being willing to walk away from the table. Even if we miss out on 65-80% of the market.

[Gergely Orosz @GergelyOrosz]

How is it allowed that:

- Audible has 65% market share in the US for audibooks

- It offers 20% royalty share to authors if audibooks are sold non-exclusive (so, outside Audible as well). So for a $10 audiobook: Amazon takes $8, publisher gets $2!

80% take rate!!

[Dr. Holly Walters @Manigarm]

It's not harmless. It's not "just an innocent thing" to be fooled by AI. You NEED to be able to discern and differentiate reality. You NEED to know how the world works on a basic level.

Because fooling you with baby animals and flowers is just the start of something much worse.

[Matthew Green @matthew_d_green]

The European Council has taken a proposal to force mandatory scanning of all photos and videos sent through private messengers (including encrypted messengers like Signal) and they’ve rebranded it as “upload moderation.” The implication is that it’s voluntary when it’s not.