I don’t have hard rules and processes to filter and order my reading list. But I know my preferences, e.g.:

• older books (especially when it’s an inspiration to another book on the list)
• availability of exact cover and edition that I want at an affordable price
• shorter books (and series)

But most of the time the choice what I’m reading next is not an active decision.

Did people at !Aii@programming.dev express that they aren’t interested in reading these articles, too? Because an AI-related community on a programming-related instance semantically conveys the same environment as a community dedicated to AI coding specifically in my opinion.

k

To me in most cases it’s the opposite. I don’t watch video tutorials to solve a specific problem (sorry, Roal Van de Paar!), but to get into something. And therefore I prefer to see the problem solving in between and the workflow for that activity. If it really tends to waste my time, I just skip forward.

I use it as the default shell only in my terminal (with fish completion). You still have to deal with breaking changes and inconsistency. On top of that, you need to wrap a lot of your commonly used commands and tools to take full advantage of it. But personally I consider it worth learning and using. Not only do I hate working with raw text, I also love the visual and interactive data representation. And working with existing tools is honestly not a huge problem. It’s just what you’d usually do regularly. Obviously POSIX-compliant shells in combination with many tools like jq, too are already capable of nushell’s power. But I just like to have it included in the shell language, so I can work with the data more casual.

I couldn’t tell you why you’d use it instead of Powershell. I just never tried Powershell on Linux.

Why should they? Less users are programming anything, but more people have become users of computers in the first place. And we have more users of computers, precisely because the levels of abstraction do not require the ordinary user to program anything. Today’s ordinary user is more “ordinary” than fifty years ago. This development of making a tool or subject more accessible to the layman, by hiding the complexities with abstractions and yet allowing more skilled users to gain advantages by peeling away the abstractions, is present in many different fields throughout the history of mankind.

If you look closely, it is not really surprising. Not even a problem at all. In fact, if you have the simple understanding that maybe somebody doesn’t want to program, not because they are a stupid idiot or a lazy normie consumer, but because they simply don’t give a shit about it, follow other interests and can contribute to the world with other skills, then the observation that most users are not programming anything, is insanely unproblematic.

Thank you! That’s exactly what I need, but I probably have a unique case where I as the developer am the cause for the feature creep myself. For work, luckily our product is an ERP software, so in most cases I’m naturally uninterested for more features :D

But I do choose this approach for these problems to not have reusable code on purpose xD I’m not try-harding to rewrite everything for every feature separately, so most of it would be separated and modular, as long as it’s required by the initial purpose of the software. However I avoid writing generic and reusable code that only gets rewarded with functional scalability in mind.

And unit testing is honestly not on my list for these kinds of projects. At best I’d write integration tests to challenge the route handlers. But simply using the software is sufficient to cover the predictably unpredictable usage in these cases.

Thanks for the recommendations. A missing understanding of what needs to be reusable could be a problem. E.g. in my example when I add a DAO-like interface just to implement it for the two entities I have, I invite my future self to add unnecessary features to make more use of that interface and other generic components.

I use mostly Rust. I meant “extending” in terms of features.

It definitely is and I wouldn’t take this approach mid-way for a project with multiple users and contributors. But it works for my little projects that desperately need me to be the user more than the developer. An example would be a REST API with a few endpoints where the database operations are handled directly in the route handlers uniquely for that specific task.

Yes, the better solution is probably not on the programming layer :D I was still interested in a specific term to this approach to look up to what extent somebody can drive this.

Whether it’s 15 seconds, minutes or hours doesn’t matter, because they care about the decision that we make immediately.

If a DRM-free digital version is available and any of these conditions apply:

• is free in digital form
• needs to be written on
• receives and provides me updates without extra costs
• doesn’t have physical eye-candy editions
• is too big

then I buy the digital version.

I buy physical books second-hand, usually from booklooker, a German platform.

Every time I see the example of people used to Twitter complaining about Mastodon’s UX and UI, the experience of using the Twitter app and the constant struggle of figuring out whether the non-sense anomaly you see is a bug or just a feature to keep you locked in is becoming an even more painful memory…

You can be interested in a subject without loving everything (/anything) about it.

More variety than AI hate here definitely sounds nice. But a broad term like “technology” is more likely to attract the big trending topics, that are most likely hated.

I can’t speak for all people, but I just don’t want Hollywood to add an unwanted aftertaste to my favorite movies. Other than that, they can do whatever they want as long as I can ignore it.

I’m exactly that young person. I won’t be even able to consume every work of art I’m interested in. That’s both sad and amazing.

For many people, drag-and-drop website builders or CMS, that incorporate the ability of creating websites with almost no coding capabilities, would be enough to create the website they need. It’s more bloated and restricted, but I’d definitely consider it accessible to the layman. It’s not a literally no-brainer solution like AI, but I consider that a feature.

Wow! I haven’t read it yet, but I must share that this is perhaps the best first impression a website has made on me.