“Holist”, as in “Looking at it as a whole, that was exhausting”. You can see how they typoed and tried to correct it.

Personally, I’ve found Poetry somewhat painful for developing medium-sized or larger applications (which I guess Python really isn’t made for to begin with, but yeah).

Big problem is that its dependency resolution is probably a magnitude slower than it should be. Anytime we changed something about the dependencies, you’d wait for more than a minute on its verdict. Which is particularly painful, when you have to resolve version conflicts.

Other big pain point is that it doesn’t support workspaces or multi-project builds or whatever you want to call them, so where you can have multiple related applications or libraries in the same repo and directly depending on each other, without needing to publish a version of the libraries each time you make a change.

When we started our last big Python project, none of the Python tooling supported workspaces out of the box. Now, there’s Rye, which does so. But yeah, I don’t have experience yet, with how well it works.

Python never had much of a central design team. People mostly just scratched their own itch, so you get lots of different tools that do only a small part each, and aren’t necessarily compatible.

We’ve got a WebAssembly web-UI at $DAYJOB. Implementation language is Rust, we use the Leptos framework (although other mature frameworks are available for Rust).

Pros:

• Same language and similar tooling as in the backend. Most libraries work the same way (obviously excluding libraries that read from the filesystem, for example). This is especially good, if you’ve got lots of “full stack” devs.
• Same model classes as in the backend. If you change a field, the compiler will force you to fix it on both sides. It is compile-time guaranteed that backend and frontend are compatible.
• Rust is a nicer language than JS/TS. I find especially Rust’s error handling via Result and Option types + pattern-matching works really well for UI stuff. You just hand the Result value over to your rendering stack and that displays either the value or the error. No unset/null variables, no separate error variable, no ternaries.
• Having a strict compiler makes it less bad when you’re lax on testing, and frontend code is a pain to test.

Cons:

• If you’ve got pure frontend folks, or people who are deep into React or Angular or whatever, those are not going to be as productive.
• The JS ecosystem is massive, you just won’t find as many component libraries for Rust, which can definitely also reduce productivity.

With me being in a team with few frontend folks, I would definitely opt for it again.

Netscape. Specifically the homophobe guy that’s now leading the Chromium-based browser Brave.

I’m being a jackass about it, because that was 28 years ago. You can’t say they should stop bloating the web and then bring up an example from before Google even existed.

Damn, I definitely won’t stop donating, if they’re this short on money, but that was basically my understanding of what they do, primarily advocacy.

Is MDN and the webstandards work also part of the Foundation? It certainly feels like it’d be more non-profit-y work. I guess, they do hold ownership of the Corporation, so they could also just tell the Corporation to deliver that.

But yeah, I’d like some increased messaging of what other work they do, or how much advocacy they can continue to do. Obviously, that’s not an insane number of employees left either way…

This is the Mozilla Foundation. They’re legally a non-profit, so this isn’t supposed to mean that they’re reconsidering their stance. They can’t do that. It’s rather just them saying “shit’s hard, yo”.

Pretty sure, Google is at the forefront of that endeavor. Apple has no interest in keeping up. And Mozilla needs to stay in the talks for whatever Google proposes to ensure the webstandard can be implemented by others.

I do not see why you think the Linux Foundation could stomp 500+ devs out of the ground and do a better job. That’s three times the size of the current Linux Foundation. Nevermind that the Linux Foundation is purely non-profit. Paying a living wage to that many devs is pretty much just not going to be possible.

Brave has a notable market share? I’ve never seen them in any graph.

Comparing the two is also a difficult territory, because Brave does not develop their own browser engine. If Google stops publishing the Chromium source code, they’re gone in a few months.

The CEO who got paid that much has quit. We don’t yet know what the salary of the new CEO is going to be.

That CEO is working for the Mozilla Corporation, these layoffs happened at the Mozilla Foundation. The latter is legally a non-profit, so it would be quite limited how much money they could accept from the Corporation anyways.

Those are job postings at the for-profit Mozilla Corporation, the layoffs happened at the non-profit Mozilla Foundation.

They’re theoretically connected, in that the Corporation is a subsidiary of the Foundation, but to my knowledge, they practically don’t hand money from the Foundation to the Corporation, because the Corporation has magnitudes more money anyways.

Well, for reasons, I happen to know that this person is a student, who has effectively no experience dealing with real-world codebases.

It’s possible that the LLM produced good results for the small codebases and well-known exercises that they had to deal with so far.

I’m also guessing, they’re learning what a PR is for the first time just now. And then being taught by Microsoft that you can just fire off PRs without a care in the world, like, yeah, how should they know any better?

Yeah, Google likes to guess the language preference based on the IP address, which thankfully never goes wrong.

Tangentially related rant: We had a new contributor open up a pull request today and I gave their changes an initial look to make sure no malicious code is included.
I couldn’t see anything wrong with it. The PR was certainly a bit short, but the task they tackled was pretty much a matter of either it works or it doesn’t. And I figured, if they open a PR, they’ll have a working solution.

…well, I tell the CI/CD runner to get going and it immediately runs into a compile error. Not an exotic compile error, the person who submitted the PR had never even tried to compile it.

Then it dawned on me. They had included a link to a GitHub Copilot workspace, supposedly just for context.
In reality, they had asked the dumbass LLM to do the change described in the ticket and figured, it would produce a working PR right off the bat. No need to even check it, just let the maintainer do the validation.

In an attempt to give them constructive feedback, I tried to figure out, if this GitHub Copilot workspace thingamabob had a Compile-button that they just forgot to click, so I actually watched Microsoft’s ad video for it.
And sure enough, I saw right then and there, who really was at fault for this abomination of a PR.

The ad showed exactly that. Just chat a bit with the LLM and then directly create a PR. Which, yes, there is a theoretical chance of this possibly making sense, like when rewording the documentation. But for any actual code changes? Fuck no.

So, most sincerely: Fuck you, Microsoft.

Business intelligence is in the context of analytics. It means something very different from “business logic”, in case you’re thinking they’re synonyms…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_intelligence

I’m curious to see, how long it’ll last. Much like with a support hotline, there’s no directly obvious financial benefit to having such a chatbot, so if the hype has died down and the price is increased, I could see those being axed pretty quickly…

I only realized just now that the lady’s outfit is Sonic-themed. She’s completely blue, because she’s a Sonic fan… 🫠

I own exactly one appliance that tries to keep the time and it has never known the correct time since I bought it. 👍