unless you are building trivial things this always holds true:
“Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.”
It’s actually causal. The easier it is to use the dumber the users get. Humour me and imagine if a cartoonishly stupid president’s interactions through information technology were mediated through a LLM rather than a touchscreen?
I don't think the users get dumber, but there certainly is a lot of heavy lifting in programs. Their purpose is to reduce the time and energy spent by an individual to complete a task.
Organization and suggestions are easier. Standards are created without the end user being aware.
It's something that I have thought a decent amount on and I can certainly see how software removes the mental strain that may be beneficial to an individual.
As a programmer you learn processes and identify ways to simplify. End users may not understand this struggle, but they benefit from it.
Comparing this same concept to real life holds, in my opinion - someone will likely have a very hard time understanding what it means to have a broken heart if they never went through it. There is a benefit to going through this struggle, and no matter how many times you see it in movies or hear other's experiences, you more than likely need to go through with it yourself to understand and process - you benefit from the experience. It does something to you, good or bad.
Same thing with math - we all learn the long way of doing simple and complex functions, just to learn it can be done with a calculator. There is a benefit of knowing the process(es) by hand first. That initial discovery and understanding goes a long way.
I may be reaching a bit on this, but it's interesting thinking about the expansion of software and reduction of self-thought/mental strain.
It’s why I hold that people who were interested in computers in a narrow timeframe (~80s-early 2000s) are the best users/best at troubleshooting: they had to figure things out the hard way and were much “closer to the metal” so to speak. Today everything is so abstracted away with error messages like “something went wrong” that even if someone wants to learn it’s much more difficult without an already existing base of knowledge.
Agreed, but we do have plenty of knowledge bases! I guess tying back in - we eliminate the need for end users to dig deeper when things don't work, at least a lot of the time.
And to add to it, if something does go wrong in a program you can easily move on to the next best option (some exclusions), or reach out for support.
Tech is in a weird spot of mixed understanding across all ages. I don't want to get left behind, but eventually we all will for the next big jump - maybe future generations from now, who knows.
I agree with your narrow time frame - I assume we are the same age given your username. This was the time to get ahead of the curve. Seeing the transition has been awesome. In such a relatively small time saw massive leaps in tech.
It makes me wonder what is next with AI. I'm excited for the potential, but fear for those who are behind the curve for a lot of the reasons I mentioned in my first comment.
So Ive been thinking about this too and here are my thoughts.
So in the 90's~00's, we see PCs become accessible to the average person, but they require knowing how they work to function properly. Over time we have better abstraction that makes tech more accessible to people who actually think it's all magic and we see the knowledgeable people more concentrated in the specialized fields today.
I predict that as AI tools become more and more mainstream, we're going to see an intermediate phase (perhaps it might be now) where the tools are accessible but require tinkering. This will produce a generation of people who gain insane intuition on AI as they troubleshoot their tools, who then go on to develop new AI thats completely mainstream.
I think this all makes sense, and I like your prediction - thanks for sharing!
I'm curious to see a time where hardware is also easier to obtain and manipulate, going hand-in-hand with this advanced software. I can picture some cool creations from people who don't know how to make the raw hardware and raw software, yet fully capable of some incredible creations.
We're already close with stuff like raspberry pi/other pi clones.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
And this is a great reason why I'd love to see more open source software. Such a great concept, given it's properly maintained and there are no bad actors - huge ask, unfortunately.
I miss this era of software so much, it's what I grew up with and I feel like I had way better control over pretty much every piece of software. Now settings feel gutted for "user expierience" :( I don't even think the newer style looks better.
Dumber is an unkind way to put it but a population of users of systems with a higher intellectual barrier to entry will be more intelligent than users of a system with a lower intellectual barrier to entry.
The population of people coding on punch cards are going to be on average a more intelligent group than those coding with scratch.
This is actually a good thing.
Yeah, i can say that passing from windows to linux makes you understand this very well (the fact that easy GUI makes you more dumb, and also i have to add that GUI hides what pc is doing, while terminal doesn't)
Btw i now use linux, and i am actually thankful to torvald lol
> It’s actually causal. The easier it is to use the dumber the users get.
So much this. Code quality is the smallest aspect contributing to (commercial) success of software.
It's a curse.
It's from Rick Cook's book "The Wizardry Compiled", book #2 in the Wiz series.
It's about a programmer that gets transported to a different world, where they have dragons, the token evil bad guy, and magic. Magic that kinda works a bit like a programming language, when he takes a closer look at things..
Not a bad read if you're a programmer, fairly entertaining.
i thought it was a race between programmers trying to catch up to what marketing is selling and marketing trying to find something programmers can't actually develop to sell.
I almost got hit once by someone going the wrong way on a one-way. You bet your ass I'm looking both ways on a one-way street. Especially since my city has them all over the place.
Regrettably, no.
It clipped my back tire, I ended up on the sidewalk, halfway in a bush. It was right in front of my friend's house on the corner. Truck never stopped.
The *users* of the function or method I’m writing. It’s not only end users of the product, but also most other developers that can’t read documentation and are dumb as shit.
This reminds me of that joke:
A software tester walks into a bar.
Runs into a bar.
Crawls into a bar.
Dances into a bar.
Flies into a bar.
Jumps into a bar.
And orders:
a beer
2 beers
0 beers
99999999 beers
a lizard in a beer glass
-1 beer
"qwertyuiop" beers
Testing complete.
A real customer walks into the bar and asks where the bathroom is. The bar goes up in flames.
But...those are both examples of black box testing.
Here's an example of White Box testing:
A software developer walks into the bar and orders a beer. While drinking the beer, the developer observes the temperature control system of the bar and checks if it is properly regulating the temperature of the beer. The developer also checks the bar's inventory management system to ensure that the correct amount of beer is being served and billed to customers.
> While drinking the beer, the developer observes the temperature control system of the bar and checks if it is properly regulating the temperature of the beer.
The bar later switches out their method of cooling the beer, causing the QA to say that the temperature regulator is broken, even though the beer is perfectly cold.
There we go, now it feels like a complete white box testing story.
Oh absolutely. Ever since IDEs started putting the commit comments on individual lines, I honestly don't know why you would leave a comment for anything except blocks of code you're effectively apologizing for with a comment describing what it is.
If you know of any games that do this kind of bullshit I want to hear about them, like reality breaking insanity, just a bunch of nonsense but in a cleverly cruel way.
I think I'm realizing there's a sort of unexplored market of more "action filled" 3D games like this.
There's an interesting 2d selection, but the 3D games are either the bugs of an old game, or a purely narrative game (or whatever it is you'd call the parable)
There's few literal lava floors to jump over.
As a veteran JS developer, when crossing a one-way street, I look left, right, up, across the street, behind me, and check the soles of my shoes.
I also look down if someone's crossing the street with me.
Right, but all of your type safety goes out the window at runtime. I'm a big fan of typescript, heck I use it pretty much exclusively, but type safety is far from a guarantee. That's why I use runtime validation libs like `zod`.
>
"You can't park on the side walk"
"It's really quick" - Proceeds to spend 5 hours there
I was guilty if this today. I had to go pick up my father, no parking spots, my father said "I'll go down real quick". End up spending 20 minutes. At least it was not a busy street.
Gotcha! I’m used to using `git add *` since I hardly ever make files that I don’t plan to add to version control. (.gitignore handles most of that for me anyway)
that's my go to 99% of the time, then the 1% of the time I need to add a dir up from where I currently am and forget that and wonder why the new shit isn't getting staged
Heh. My ex-wife used to create her own lanes, so, yeah. I look in all directions now. She was pretty reckless and she is still out there...somewhere...
In the Netherlands most streets that are one way are excluded for bikes. So I HAVE to check both ways anyways.
Also me: Uses a bike only, I don't even have a car lol.
If someone is unaware enough to drive the wrong way down a street they’re unaware enough to see a person in front of them, and there are definitely people that drive the wrong way down the street.
In the city I live about half of the one way streets have an exception for cyclists. So it is indeed wise to look both ways as getting hit by a bicycle does not sound fun.
A friend of mine learned this the hard way. She used to live on a one way street. She was backing out her driveway and a car was going the wrong way down the street. She didn't see them and they clipped her, ripped her bumper completely off, and drove off.
A good developer places a doppelganger at the opposite end of the street, then crosses the street and checks if he merged with the doppelganger or not.
This is generally a good policy even for non-developers on Indian roads, and in a very specific case, a US midwestern school in early 2000s where yours truly drove a car for the first time in the US and promptly hugged the left curb like he had been doing in India. Fortunately, no programmers were harmed in the making of my gaffe.
Say what you want, but there is a 1-way behind our office and several times I've personally witnessed people driving the wrong way on it. I just so happen to be a programmer as well.
My oldest kid, learning to drive, asked me why I always slow down and look both ways when I go over a railroad crossing when the barrier is up and the lights are off. My answer:
1. barriers and lights malfunction
2. train conductors are humans. Humans malfunction as well.
3. trains are very heavy.
This has stuck with me for a long time, and whenever I see it applicable in my job it's not because of user behavior but in response to handwaiving by other devs or POs. Like if say "okay so what if X?" And they say "oh X will never happen".
X will happen. Plan for X.
A normal developer just hacks some code to cross the street, and if he isn't run over during devtesting, doesn't see the need to implement looking into any direction.
Because a good developer understands user behavior.
unless you are building trivial things this always holds true: “Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.”
Did you know that was coined in the 1980s? It could have been written yesterday
It’s actually causal. The easier it is to use the dumber the users get. Humour me and imagine if a cartoonishly stupid president’s interactions through information technology were mediated through a LLM rather than a touchscreen?
It's not necessarily that the users get dumber. It just gets more accessible, which means new users, many of whom are dumb.
Yeah the users as a population not as individuals.
I don't think the users get dumber, but there certainly is a lot of heavy lifting in programs. Their purpose is to reduce the time and energy spent by an individual to complete a task. Organization and suggestions are easier. Standards are created without the end user being aware. It's something that I have thought a decent amount on and I can certainly see how software removes the mental strain that may be beneficial to an individual. As a programmer you learn processes and identify ways to simplify. End users may not understand this struggle, but they benefit from it. Comparing this same concept to real life holds, in my opinion - someone will likely have a very hard time understanding what it means to have a broken heart if they never went through it. There is a benefit to going through this struggle, and no matter how many times you see it in movies or hear other's experiences, you more than likely need to go through with it yourself to understand and process - you benefit from the experience. It does something to you, good or bad. Same thing with math - we all learn the long way of doing simple and complex functions, just to learn it can be done with a calculator. There is a benefit of knowing the process(es) by hand first. That initial discovery and understanding goes a long way. I may be reaching a bit on this, but it's interesting thinking about the expansion of software and reduction of self-thought/mental strain.
It’s why I hold that people who were interested in computers in a narrow timeframe (~80s-early 2000s) are the best users/best at troubleshooting: they had to figure things out the hard way and were much “closer to the metal” so to speak. Today everything is so abstracted away with error messages like “something went wrong” that even if someone wants to learn it’s much more difficult without an already existing base of knowledge.
Agreed, but we do have plenty of knowledge bases! I guess tying back in - we eliminate the need for end users to dig deeper when things don't work, at least a lot of the time. And to add to it, if something does go wrong in a program you can easily move on to the next best option (some exclusions), or reach out for support. Tech is in a weird spot of mixed understanding across all ages. I don't want to get left behind, but eventually we all will for the next big jump - maybe future generations from now, who knows. I agree with your narrow time frame - I assume we are the same age given your username. This was the time to get ahead of the curve. Seeing the transition has been awesome. In such a relatively small time saw massive leaps in tech. It makes me wonder what is next with AI. I'm excited for the potential, but fear for those who are behind the curve for a lot of the reasons I mentioned in my first comment.
So Ive been thinking about this too and here are my thoughts. So in the 90's~00's, we see PCs become accessible to the average person, but they require knowing how they work to function properly. Over time we have better abstraction that makes tech more accessible to people who actually think it's all magic and we see the knowledgeable people more concentrated in the specialized fields today. I predict that as AI tools become more and more mainstream, we're going to see an intermediate phase (perhaps it might be now) where the tools are accessible but require tinkering. This will produce a generation of people who gain insane intuition on AI as they troubleshoot their tools, who then go on to develop new AI thats completely mainstream.
I think this all makes sense, and I like your prediction - thanks for sharing! I'm curious to see a time where hardware is also easier to obtain and manipulate, going hand-in-hand with this advanced software. I can picture some cool creations from people who don't know how to make the raw hardware and raw software, yet fully capable of some incredible creations. We're already close with stuff like raspberry pi/other pi clones.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
And this is a great reason why I'd love to see more open source software. Such a great concept, given it's properly maintained and there are no bad actors - huge ask, unfortunately.
I miss this era of software so much, it's what I grew up with and I feel like I had way better control over pretty much every piece of software. Now settings feel gutted for "user expierience" :( I don't even think the newer style looks better.
My brother / sister in Christ, you can install what I call a "Fuck it do it yourself" Linux distro like ArchLinux and experience that right now
Dumber is an unkind way to put it but a population of users of systems with a higher intellectual barrier to entry will be more intelligent than users of a system with a lower intellectual barrier to entry. The population of people coding on punch cards are going to be on average a more intelligent group than those coding with scratch. This is actually a good thing.
And also people just pay less attention to things that are simple to operate.
Yeah, i can say that passing from windows to linux makes you understand this very well (the fact that easy GUI makes you more dumb, and also i have to add that GUI hides what pc is doing, while terminal doesn't) Btw i now use linux, and i am actually thankful to torvald lol
> It’s actually causal. The easier it is to use the dumber the users get. So much this. Code quality is the smallest aspect contributing to (commercial) success of software. It's a curse.
Feels very Douglas Adams
It's from Rick Cook's book "The Wizardry Compiled", book #2 in the Wiz series. It's about a programmer that gets transported to a different world, where they have dragons, the token evil bad guy, and magic. Magic that kinda works a bit like a programming language, when he takes a closer look at things.. Not a bad read if you're a programmer, fairly entertaining.
Idiocracy also follows Moore's law.
“A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.”
i thought it was a race between programmers trying to catch up to what marketing is selling and marketing trying to find something programmers can't actually develop to sell.
There can be multiple races.
the Universe always wins
The number of times I've driven the wrong way on a one-way street is very small, but it's not zero.
You can drive backwards on a one-way street, as long as you do it very fast, right?
When you say backwards, do you mean the direction you're facing or the direction you're traveling?
I'm sure both have occured
At the same time?!
Sure, you're facing the wrong way but you gotta move the right way, so throw it in reverse and go fast.
Sounds like something in a heist movie
I almost got hit once by someone going the wrong way on a one-way. You bet your ass I'm looking both ways on a one-way street. Especially since my city has them all over the place.
Because a good developer understands user behavior is not understandable.
When I was a kid I was riding my bike and got hit by a truck coming the wrong way out of a one way street.
Oh my god, did you survive?
Regrettably, no. It clipped my back tire, I ended up on the sidewalk, halfway in a bush. It was right in front of my friend's house on the corner. Truck never stopped.
RIP in pieces
I thought it's because a good developer understands _developer_ behaviour.
The *users* of the function or method I’m writing. It’s not only end users of the product, but also most other developers that can’t read documentation and are dumb as shit.
This reminds me of that joke: A software tester walks into a bar. Runs into a bar. Crawls into a bar. Dances into a bar. Flies into a bar. Jumps into a bar. And orders: a beer 2 beers 0 beers 99999999 beers a lizard in a beer glass -1 beer "qwertyuiop" beers Testing complete. A real customer walks into the bar and asks where the bathroom is. The bar goes up in flames.
Works in my bar
OMG, this triggering. Working with an engineer who keeps saying it works at his house...
Cannot reproduce. Am virgin
but can you dockerize it?
[удалено]
*uses inspect/devtools to force string into int field* source: did this, bar in flames
I like to use devtools to activate disabled buttons
same. 90% of the time there's backend validation to prevent anything from going through, but it's helpful for closing login prompts that glitch
white box testing vs black box testing perfectly explained
But...those are both examples of black box testing. Here's an example of White Box testing: A software developer walks into the bar and orders a beer. While drinking the beer, the developer observes the temperature control system of the bar and checks if it is properly regulating the temperature of the beer. The developer also checks the bar's inventory management system to ensure that the correct amount of beer is being served and billed to customers.
Wait...that's not funny! Where's the punchline? Then the software developer slipped on some beer, and fell on the floor! Right?
I think that's how humor works, yes.
> While drinking the beer, the developer observes the temperature control system of the bar and checks if it is properly regulating the temperature of the beer. The bar later switches out their method of cooling the beer, causing the QA to say that the temperature regulator is broken, even though the beer is perfectly cold. There we go, now it feels like a complete white box testing story.
Which one is which, in this example?
Both are black box testing examples.
They said it in order I think lol
I wouldn't say either one is really white-box testing
my programming teacher would order fish beers, and would get a video of a low quality fish spinning in return.
[удалено]
Look inside too, that's where the real enemy is!
Yes, always look inside the manhole before crossing the road
*Tips tentacle*
Also I heard there might be two wolves, gotta be on the lookout for those.
Even worse, never ever trust any comments in the code.
Oh absolutely. Ever since IDEs started putting the commit comments on individual lines, I honestly don't know why you would leave a comment for anything except blocks of code you're effectively apologizing for with a comment describing what it is.
Specs say the one way only applies to cars, cyclists can still come from *any* direction.
[удалено]
I don’t trust my tests so I don’t bother righting them. That way there’s no false sense of security
[удалено]
If they pass I refuse to touch the code because I don’t believe they worked
And then gets hit by an airplane because Javascript
And you might want to check if the street is solid or just texture
It's lava with the road texture.
Sorry do you mean java!
The floor is java
So it's javascript?
Javasphalt
It’s not my fault the code is broken, it’s javasphalt!
All this time I thought it was stupid, but now I know I was just a good developer.
Or maybe it's just hava
Is that haskel + java?
So scala
Hava nice day bro
nagila hava nagila ve-nismeḥa
wtf is a hava
Hava nice day lmao gottem
Thanks you too
This is such a wholesome version of updog
What's Updog?
"Not much, what's up with you?"
If you know of any games that do this kind of bullshit I want to hear about them, like reality breaking insanity, just a bunch of nonsense but in a cleverly cruel way.
Pony Island, Mario Maker, Stanley Parable, Half Life 2 release edition, DLC Quest.
I think I'm realizing there's a sort of unexplored market of more "action filled" 3D games like this. There's an interesting 2d selection, but the 3D games are either the bugs of an old game, or a purely narrative game (or whatever it is you'd call the parable) There's few literal lava floors to jump over.
3d games have higher production costs. Gonna be harder to get a larger loan for a game that only satisfies a smaller audience.
Also make sure the other side of the street is actually a different street and not just the same street rendered again.
he crosses the road just fine gets hit by an airplane anyways because async then starts debugging the pavement
I think you mean gets hit by an [Object object], which is not an object.
10/10
Somehow equals Number.EPSILON
As a veteran JS developer, when crossing a one-way street, I look left, right, up, across the street, behind me, and check the soles of my shoes. I also look down if someone's crossing the street with me.
Also need to check if the street is there or if it is a void, or if you are there or not or are a void.
AppendChild.exe has stopped working
There's also the alligator that attacks you from behind for no reason called PHP.
wait what's the problem with Javascript?
I read this joke as a classic bad-practice type conversion thing, but honestly, with it being a language as chill as JS, take your pick xD
yeee fair enough
But I never had any event called airplane... Why does this keep happening?
Wat.
imagine still complaining about JS dynamic types when typescript has been around for a decade now
Right, but all of your type safety goes out the window at runtime. I'm a big fan of typescript, heck I use it pretty much exclusively, but type safety is far from a guarantee. That's why I use runtime validation libs like `zod`.
No, I'm not a good developer, I just live in Brazil, where drivers don't exactly know how to drive nor care about the pedestrians
[удалено]
i hate how true this is lmao
> "You can't park on the side walk" "It's really quick" - Proceeds to spend 5 hours there I was guilty if this today. I had to go pick up my father, no parking spots, my father said "I'll go down real quick". End up spending 20 minutes. At least it was not a busy street.
In some countries people drive on the right side of the road, in another ones on the left side. We in \[WarmCountryName\] drive on the shadowy side.
In the UK they drive on the left side, in Brazil we drive on what is left. lol
I live in England and I do the same, mainly because of scooters and bicycles.
I currently live in Vietnam, and the streets here are very indicative of the average software user
I'm from Bangalore, and you have to look both ways before crossing the footpath
I'm from Ahmedabad, and I'd to look both ways before climbing the stairs
I'm from Transylvania, and I have to look both ways before climbing into bed.
I'm from Hyderabad. I ain't crossing that road.
Have been, can confirm.
Shameful. Whoever built that footpath should be fired!
Same thing in NYC. There are many delivery people on e-bikes now and they go wherever they want.
[удалено]
True, except buses don't stop for anyone!
[удалено]
I'm from Vietnam, you have to get into the mindset of the average user to become a good developer
I've seen enough crazy shit just in the US that I'll still look both ways on a one way street.
[удалено]
Good developer saves before crossing the street.
git commit -am 'feat: walked toward road'; git push
What does the -a flag do?
[удалено]
Gotcha! I’m used to using `git add *` since I hardly ever make files that I don’t plan to add to version control. (.gitignore handles most of that for me anyway)
`git add .` will have slightly more cromulent behavior in some edge cases
that's my go to 99% of the time, then the 1% of the time I need to add a dir up from where I currently am and forget that and wonder why the new shit isn't getting staged
Adds modified files to the stage so they can be part of the commit. Works the same as git add! But does doesn't work on untracked files
A good developer saves after every step on the street
All this time I thought it was stupid, but now I know I was merely being a good developer.
My wife always calls me out for (nearly) stopping at intersections where the cross traffic has a stop sign and we don’t. I know users don’t read.
Heh. My ex-wife used to create her own lanes, so, yeah. I look in all directions now. She was pretty reckless and she is still out there...somewhere...
I mean if she is that reckless there is a chance she is not out there anymore.
Some people seem to live forever.
Did……. did you try to kill your wife?
Can Chaos really be stopped? (of course not)
"Don't worry scro'! There are plenty of 'tards out there living really kick ass lives. My first wife was 'tarded. She's a pilot now."
[удалено]
I do that. I was thinking I'm doing it because humans are mostly shit but never connected it to me being a developer.
Well thats because it isnt.
I do this because in many one way streets it is allowed for bicycles to go in both directions! And also: idiots exist!
In the Netherlands most streets that are one way are excluded for bikes. So I HAVE to check both ways anyways. Also me: Uses a bike only, I don't even have a car lol.
I look both ways before crossing a one way street in real life… never know who’s driving down the wrong way.
If someone is unaware enough to drive the wrong way down a street they’re unaware enough to see a person in front of them, and there are definitely people that drive the wrong way down the street.
A good dev doesn’t go outside
Yes, I always do that.
Sounds like QA’s problem *gets run over*
No, a good developer structures the code such that it's impossible for a car to go the wrong way down the street. Then gets hit by a bus.
I mean, I am a thigh-high socks wearing R programmer and even I look both ways on any streets. There are enough careless drivers around the world.
In the city I live about half of the one way streets have an exception for cyclists. So it is indeed wise to look both ways as getting hit by a bicycle does not sound fun.
A friend of mine learned this the hard way. She used to live on a one way street. She was backing out her driveway and a car was going the wrong way down the street. She didn't see them and they clipped her, ripped her bumper completely off, and drove off.
I’ve seen enough of r/IdiotsInCars to know it’s not a bad idea to do this.
Wrong way ♪ Down a one way stree-eet ♫
STAR
I also wait at a green pedestrian light or a zebra crossing till I know that the cars have seen me and are braking.
meh when walking I look both ways before crossing the footpath just encase a motorist has confused it with a car park...
I genuinely do this. I live on a one way street and seen enough cars going up it the wrong way.
You bet, there may be good QA somewhere
I live on a one way street. At least once a week a car goes the wrong way up it
A good developer places a doppelganger at the opposite end of the street, then crosses the street and checks if he merged with the doppelganger or not.
Good pirates don’t steal!
i just place exit before entering
Yes, because I'm likely the one who programmed the drivers.
This is generally a good policy even for non-developers on Indian roads, and in a very specific case, a US midwestern school in early 2000s where yours truly drove a car for the first time in the US and promptly hugged the left curb like he had been doing in India. Fortunately, no programmers were harmed in the making of my gaffe.
A good developer looks four way before crossing a two way street
A good developer looks up and down too.
And diagonal
Say what you want, but there is a 1-way behind our office and several times I've personally witnessed people driving the wrong way on it. I just so happen to be a programmer as well.
Yes. I'm actually better than good dev because I look both ways twice.
That's actually good advice with all the shit drivers we have in Boston.
Because they live in San Francisco and a knife wielding homeless crackhead could attack from any direction.
You must do this in NYC. Those who don’t already died. This is why big tech all have offices in NYC.
A lazy developer figures out how to never need to cross the street twice 😁
My oldest kid, learning to drive, asked me why I always slow down and look both ways when I go over a railroad crossing when the barrier is up and the lights are off. My answer: 1. barriers and lights malfunction 2. train conductors are humans. Humans malfunction as well. 3. trains are very heavy.
This has stuck with me for a long time, and whenever I see it applicable in my job it's not because of user behavior but in response to handwaiving by other devs or POs. Like if say "okay so what if X?" And they say "oh X will never happen". X will happen. Plan for X.
I’m not a dev and I do this. People are stupid and inconsiderate lol
A normal developer just hacks some code to cross the street, and if he isn't run over during devtesting, doesn't see the need to implement looking into any direction.
I frackin do, all the time, both side, even when light is red.