Very interesting discussion weighting the main differences and disagreements between a Philosophy of Software Design, and Clean Code. I read and own both books and those differences were crystal clear, it's nice to see the authors debate them. I'm a bit disappointed at the section about TDD though, I think it could have been a bit more conclusive. It gives me food for thought about my TDD teaching though and confirms some of the messages I'm trying to push to reduce confusion.

Or why even the core git developers don't really use the defaults. This piece gives good knobs to play with in order to have a nicer experience.

It could be so much better indeed. Unfortunately in great part this is about UX design and carrying heavyweight frontend frameworks though...

Not all of this makes sense... Why are they collecting so much from an IDE?

They help with some issues... but they can't solve all the memory safety issues of the language I'm afraid.

The proposed three traits are definitely spot on. Too much confidence is a red flag, some balance needs to be found.

This is indeed forgotten features available in our desktop and browsers. It can be very convenient.

We're indeed close to universal HTTPS adoption. One last push please?

Definitely this. It's important for an organization to create knowledge... and this requires both people willing to learn and to teach.

Very interesting paper on the IPv6 transition. It shows quite well the stagnation we're in and provides good arguments about why it is so slow to transition.

This is definitely a fun and interesting project. Such decentralized mesh network are tempting to play with.

That's a lot of stalkerware in the wild. And this exploit is only about two such apps. What's wrong with people that they install this kind of crap on their loved ones smarphones?

A neat little introduction to an important field in computer science. Lambda calculus is often too little known but it has very important ramifications in several fields.

More feedback about uv use in the wild. This is getting really close to becoming the de facto solution for new projects.

Early days but this looks like an interesting solution to democratize the inference of large models.

This is a good satire which shows well the excuses people use to not test first.

I like this paper, it's well balanced. The conclusion says is all: if you're not actively working on reducing the harms then you might be doing something unethical. It's not just a toy to play with, you have to think about the impacts and actively reduce them.

I'm not sure I would phrase it like this but there's quite some truth to it. It's important to figure out what we take for granted and to open the black boxes. This is where one finds mastery.

Interesting research, looking forward to the follow ups to see how it evolves over time. For sure the number of issues is way to high still to make trustworthy systems around search and news.

This might be accidental but this highlights the lack of transparency on how those models are produced. It also means we should get ready for future generation of such models to turn into very subtle propaganda machines. Indeed even if for now it's accidental I doubt it'll be the case much longer.