Carl Sagan.

Ok, you’re right in this sense. However, I meant beaten badly in the sense of expectations vs. reality. If you followed any media, it was supposed to be a slight edge for Kamala, or at least a good chance for an upset. In the end the R’s got president, senate and congress. And the outcome was clear after the first few hours, unlike something like Gore vs. Bush.

There was a lot more demonstrations and outrage during Trump’s first term. I think now everyone is just exhausted and over it. Dems got beaten pretty bad in the election, and are probably very demoralized after this outcome. Maybe it will add up to a landslide in the next senate/congress election, maybe not.

I bet you were very badly wrong in your comment, but I would have at least like to see it (and down vote it too if it deserved it). I don’t need protection from stupid, just illegal or outright racist/offensive.

Greedy assholes definitely ruin a lot for all of us.

Harari claims something similar in his book Sapiens, so it might not be so far fetched. However, even then people would have to pay for being alive with their work, even if it’s less.

This is true also when you have strong unions to bargain for good benefits. Still, you need to do some work, as opposed to the message of the meme “you have to pay for being alive”.

The only problem is the exploitative angle of the whole thing. They do underpaid work, but the farm owning corporation gets to keep the profits.

Before 1989 there was also a third option: move to West Berlin!

Has there ever been a time in human history where we were just allowed to exist for our passions and not work for survival? Our economic system definitely has its flaws, but this meme paints with too broad strokes.

Well, bad code is bad code regardless of the paradigm. I’ve just had bad experiences rewriting some horrible OOP codebases and opted out to use as much functional style as C# allowed me to.

The main problem, as I see it, is that OOP encourages unnecessary abstractions and inheritance. These should be used as little as possible, because they typically increase complexity and make code harder to read and untangle. As an example, I’ve seen people define interfaces that don’t essentially define anything.

Another problem is that OOP encourages mutable member variables. It’s very annoying to try to understand code where class C inherits from class B that inherits from class C. Good luck debugging when the methods of C modify a variable declared in A in subtle ways.

As an idea OOP is very appealing. When I was younger, I would be thrilled to start designing a class hierarchy and interfaces when encountering a new programming challenge. Now I just try to think how to make things as simple and modular as possible.

Edit: of course bad functional code is also bad code. It’s also very annoying to try to understand code where functions pass badly named functions around as parameters and use 10 function compositions in a sequence.

You did the right thing. OOP was invented by people who were worried about their job security, to obstruct others from understanding their code.

This is non-news. It’s just a small Anschluss to obtain a bit of Lebensraum. Nothing nefarious as the article tries to make it seem.

Just remember to mark all the things you’d like to make better but can’t be arsed to at the moment with numerous TODOs.

Hi colleague! So I found a comment in the code from 3 years ago by you saying you should “improve this”. Is it planned for the next sprint?

Don’t you even think about the billionaires, bro?