> While I don’t read the implementation of anything any more unless there’s a hard algorithmic problem, I do make an effort to read and document APIs thoroughly.
I have some questions.
Are you doing this for client-facing production code?
It seems you believe painting over APIs with some amount of documentation will guarantee the implementation is correct and well designed. Am I misreading that?
You say you still read code when code is « algorithmically hard ». How do you define that?
Software systems have requirements that are essential but not algorithmically hard. For instance, access control in a web application must be thorough and cover all REST resources. How do you know the implementation has the desired properties if you don’t read the code?
Do you have tests? How do you know they’re correct if you don’t read the code? Moreover, how do know if their coverage is sufficient if you don’t read the code?
Do you refactor code or is that not needed anymore?
I don’t understand your answer to the question of why anyone would publish a library if no one reads code anymore. « For the exact same reasons as before ». How so? This isn’t making sense.
I’ve had plenty of uber drivers with a camera inside the car. I was not offended by their seeming lack of trust. They had stories to tell that made me realize these cameras were very much needed.
> Would love to see you convince the landlords to refurbish the building to use expensive heatpumps when gas is already in place.
They've been redoing the insulation since new regulation was enforced in France and Germany, it's been years now. So, that kind of thing is doable, except billions have been spent for a dubious result (look it up, Germans heat just as much as before). I am appalled at the complete lack of information on these subjects. For shame.
EDIT: Fact checking myself, the Germans have been reducing their heating, but significantly lower than expected because of a rebound effect (part of the efficiency gain is converted into comfort).
That’s a fair point. More years of life lost due to gun deaths.
I still like to draw a parallel, because they’re both deaths that we have the means to prevent, but the culture perpetuates the problem. That culture needs to change (doable in Europe with regard to AC because heatwaves will snap people out of denial, much harder or impossible to solve the gun culture problem in the US).
« Heating is absurdly expensive with leaky building so people prioritize insulating. »
Nope, heat pumps are cheaper and more efficient. Insulating did not even make a dent in reducing emissions in Germany after years of trying.
Whataboutism about cold related deaths doesn’t change anything about the heat related deaths. Did you know the Philippines lose fewer people to heat than Europe, per capita? They have AC.
Again, you’ve been misinformed. Please research the subject, use an LLM, whatever you need. The information is right there.
Something needs to be done with the heat. The common euro talking point: aircon doesn’t solve the problem, let’s insulate instead (an order of magnitude more expensive). Apparently you entertain an even more absurd idea: let’s just do nothing, because everyone is too poor. That’s just wrong, plenty of home owners or real estate owners have the means to foot the bills, especially if regulation mandates or subsidises heat pumps.
Besides that, just know you’re participating in a system of belief that needlessly kills thousands each year (and many more to come, if you believe as I hope that climate change is real). Just dwell on it a little. Thousands dead because of ideological comfort and resistance to change, which in and of itself is a weird form of climate skepticism.
If you answer this, please address each of my points from both comments. You have adressed none so far.
That’s because you pay attention to your body and you’re not in denial. Above 37 degrees, your body cannot regulate itself, and it starts being seriously uncomfortable before that. Going outside for a run when it’s 40 is unbelievably stupid.
Unless the aircon is a heat pump, in which case it’s also useful in the winter, it’s more efficient and carbon neutral if your electricity grid is decarbonised.
If most people can’t afford a heat pump, why do we entertain the idea of making them pay an order of magnitude more to better insulate their home, which doesn’t even work in the end?
You’ve been misinformed by European media. Please do your research, it’s all online.
Does the « greed of the few » include the masses who use air travel across the world, who use cars, who rely on energy infrastructure? I guess the answer is somehow no, because this is populist drivel of the worst kind. Did not expect that here.
I have some questions.
Are you doing this for client-facing production code?
It seems you believe painting over APIs with some amount of documentation will guarantee the implementation is correct and well designed. Am I misreading that?
You say you still read code when code is « algorithmically hard ». How do you define that?
Software systems have requirements that are essential but not algorithmically hard. For instance, access control in a web application must be thorough and cover all REST resources. How do you know the implementation has the desired properties if you don’t read the code?
Do you have tests? How do you know they’re correct if you don’t read the code? Moreover, how do know if their coverage is sufficient if you don’t read the code?
Do you refactor code or is that not needed anymore?
I don’t understand your answer to the question of why anyone would publish a library if no one reads code anymore. « For the exact same reasons as before ». How so? This isn’t making sense.