At most places I've worked, we can still get things done when AWS/GCP/Azure/OCI are down. For my own selfhosted work, I'm more self-reliant. But I'm aware there are some companies who do 100% of their work within AWS/GCP/Azure/OCI and are probably 100% down when they go down. That's a consequence of how they decided to architect their apps, services and infrastructure.
Where I live, ballot are a piece of paper slipped into an envelope (not sealed). It's mandatory to take at least two different ballots before entering a voting booth. You can take a picture with one ballot inside the envelope and switch before leaving the booth.
Not only that but paper in a voting booth is so simple that anyone can check that it is done properly.
It may be a burdensome process, but very simple to understand. Every modernization of the process has major drawbacks.
– Electronic voting machines cannot be verified by just any voter, and the vote count is not transparent.
– Remote voting (even paper-based) does not guarantee freedom of choice: it cannot be ensured that the person is not under pressure at home, or even that it is truly that person who is voting.
- Voting alone in a private booth ensures that no one can verify who a person voted for. It is therefore difficult to buy votes, since it is impossible to confirm that a person followed any instructions.
The fact that any voter can verify and ensure that everything is conducted properly, without having to trust a third party, is essential to guaranteeing the integrity of the vote.
I've been using Django for the last 10+ years, its ORM is good-ish. At some point there was a trend to use sqlalchemy instead but it was not worth the effort. The Manager interface is also quite confusing at first. What I find really great is the migration tool.
Since Django has gained mature native migrations there is a lot less point to using SQLAlchemy in a Django project, though SQLAlchemy is undeniably the superior and far more capable ORM. That should be unsurprising though - sqlalchemy is more code than the entire django package, and sqlalchemy + alembic is roughly five times as many LOC as django.db, and both are similar "density" code.
It's called Symbiogenesis [0] and it's not at all a wild theory. But it's limited to cell components, not multiples organs fusing to create something as complex as a mammal.
The whole issue, as clearly explained by the maintainers, isn't that the code is incorrect or not useful, it's the transfer of the burden of maintaining this large codebase to someone else. Basically: “I have this huge AI-generated pile of code that I haven't fully read, understood, or tested. Could you review, maintain, and fix it for me?”
It's a tell, a common language quirk of LLMs especially ChatGPT.
- a slow-loading app isn’t just an annoyance. It’s a liability.
- The real performance story isn’t splitting hairs over 3ms differences, it’s the massive gap between next-gen and React/Angular
- The difference [...] isn’t academic. It’s the difference between an app that feels professional and one that makes our users look bad in front of clients.
- This isn’t a todo list with hardcoded arrays. It’s a real app with database persistence.
- This isn’t just an inconvenience. It’s technofeudalism.
- “We only know React” isn’t a technical constraint, it’s a learning investment decision.
- The real difficulty isn’t learning curve, it’s creating a engineering culture.
- This isn’t some toy todo list. It’s a solid mid-complexity app with real database persistence using SQLite.
- The App Store isn’t a marketplace, it’s a fiefdom.
reply