|
A deepdive into developer productivity metrics used by Google, LinkedIn, Peloton, Amplitude, Intercom, Notion, Postman, and 10 other tech companies. Ask everyone if they're working hard or hardly working
|
|
|
|
|
JetBrains’ Developer Ecosystem 2023 report shows where C++ developers stand on C++ language versions, IDEs, package managers, build tools, code analysis tools, and AI-assisted development. Let’s dive in. On the stack?
|
|
|
|
|
A new $20 subscription will unlock Microsoft’s AI-powered Copilot inside Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. Clippy goes pro
|
|
|
|
|
There is a robust debate ongoing in the scientific community. At least we still have Bob
|
|
|
|
|
Media and entertainment, banking, insurance, and logistics lead the way. Not for them (obviously)
|
|
|
|
|
CEOs are probably the easiest job to replace with an AI.
At the CEO level of a large company, there is relatively little they can do to affect the minutiae of day-to-day operations. All they do is outline "policy", which is their best guess as what would maximize shareholder value. The rules of thumb that they use could be encoded in an expert system that would probably do the right thing about as often as a human CEO. The maintenance costs would be much lower than the CEO's salary, perks, golden parachute, etc.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
All very true, but also the job least likely to have someone decide to replace with AI. Although I suppose the Board of Directors could decide to try.
Speaking of which, the BoD would also be easy to replace with AI.
TTFN - Kent
|
|
|
|
|
On second thoughts, the biggest impediment to replacing a CEO (or the Board of Directors) with an AI is the legal requirement that a corporation have "Responsible Officers". I doubt that an AI is considered a "person" under the law.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Scrum makes peace when there is war, bringing together business people and developers. Defined like that, it sounds like a win-win situation. Not all of them - some probably have never met one
|
|
|
|
|
I've never met one. But then I've never seen a company's non-IT business units ever buy into Scrum enough to participate. I shall spare you my usual 20-minute rant about Scrum. You're welcome.
There are no solutions, only trade-offs. - Thomas Sowell
A day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Calvin (Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes)
|
|
|
|
|
I wanted to write about modern graphics APIs at first, how exclusive they are depending of the platform you are developing on (and for), and how difficult to use they are. However, after (over-)thinking about this blog post, I came to the conclusion that this problem could be generalized to all software. A semi-regular reminder
|
|
|
|
|
Which is pretty much the reason I switched to web development, though granted, it still pushes the problem elsewhere to some extent. But with numerous platform-agnostic languages supporting server-side stuff, and more-or-less browser-agnostic front-end and with a good framework to handle mobile, the problem of what hardware on what platform is less of an issue, IMO, unless you need real performance. 
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: what hardware on what platform is less of an issue, IMO, unless you need real performance.
Ah, but that, IMO, is where the real challenges lie. Writing performant code for a resource-intensive task is the kind of challenge that I really enjoy.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
FedEx is planning to launch an ecommerce platform called “fdx” later this year. What are the shipping choices?
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: What are the shipping choices?
Dog and pony show.
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: What are the shipping choices?
Pony Express.
|
|
|
|
|
The CAMM2 spec was recently finalized, and memory makers are testing the waters. You mean we'll soon be able to bend the pins on our memory chips again?
Great times!
|
|
|
|
|
In the latest wave of anti-ad blocker measures implemented by YouTube, AdBlock users have been reporting widespread performance issues with the extension enabled. Great news for those who enjoy 15 minutes of ads every 10 minutes
|
|
|
|
|
DOSP involves initially releasing software under a proprietary license, followed by a planned transition to an open source license. OPevNtually Sourcsometime?
meh
|
|
|
|
|
The tech sector has kicked off the new year with a spate of fresh job cuts that are coming at the same time as the industry is doubling down on investments into artificial intelligence. One couldn't be causing the other, could it?
|
|
|
|
|
Apple customers wanting to buy an Apple Vision Pro may have to sit through a lengthy sales pitch, including a 25-minute in-store demonstration on how to use the headset. What if you just want to buy it, and not marry it?
|
|
|
|
|
Java is not the language it used to be, and that is mostly a good thing. Here are eleven ways Java is evolving to meet the challenges of the future. Because this one goes to 11:throws VersionException?
|
|
|
|
|
A six year old Linux kernel mailing list discussion has been reignited over the prospects of converting the Linux kernel to supporting modern C++ code. If you kids keep asking, I'm going to turn this car around
And it's BACK TO WINNIPEG!
|
|
|
|
|
Not a Linux user here so I can see both sides of this.
Pro - Modern C and C++ has tools to assist in the elimination of buffer errors, which are the single biggest technical source of breaches.
Con - Changing working and reasonably well debugged code is stupid without an overriding reason to do so.
Seriously, if the goal is to eliminate C code then Linux needs to shift to something like Rust, Java, or C# for the OS. The entire C language is a security breach waiting to happen as it's impossible to ever verify correctness in something as complex as a modern operating system. IBM (OS/360), Honeywell (OS/360 emulator), Digital Equipment (VMS), MIT (Multics) etc., all knew this and wrote their operating systems using descripter controlled counted buffers. The result was their operating systems were secure by both design and implementation. It was K&R who broke this model by creating C and writing the first version of Unix in C. We've been fighting memory bugs ever since when we had the solution right from the beginning.
|
|
|
|
|
obermd wrote: ...descripter controlled counted buffers
Wow! Putting this in quotes and googling it returns 0 results. Do you have any sources overviewing this approach? It sounds interesting, and I hadn't heard about these before.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
