I liked Jonathan Blow’s ‘Preventing The Collapse of Civilisation’ talk on the same topic from 2019. [1] Although, it’s more related to software engineering. Previously discussed on a couple occasions. [2][3]
From Apple's support page [1] (Secure Enclave section near the bottom):
> The chip in your device includes an advanced security architecture called the Secure Enclave, which was developed to protect your passcode and fingerprint data. Touch ID doesn't store any images of your fingerprint, and instead relies only on a mathematical representation. It isn't possible for someone to reverse engineer your actual fingerprint image from this stored data.
It's pretty easy to make use of Touch ID for `sudo` authentication, for instance [2].
This article made me realise that I don't know how to perform step-through debugging on chained of operations on Streams in Java, so I looked it up. I found out that there's Stream Trace Dialog in IntelliJ IDEA [0]. I guess it proves your point that working with Stream API requires additional tooling in cases when the code doesn't 'just work'.
the ideal scenario with functional programming like this is to reason about the code, and may be algebraically model it mentally so that you "know" it works.
But i find a lot of programmers don't do that - but instead write a first version which they don't truly understand (or understand completely), and then use stepped debugging to tweak the program until they get to a verison that works to their desired outcome.
Ideal scenarios rarely exist IRL. You may be in a rush. Inexperienced. Tired. On a problem you don't completely understand yet. With incomplete information. Exploring data or the problem space. Experimenting with an API. Trying to debug the code your colleague wrote, or a bug in the underlying lib.
That's why practicality beats purity in the vast majority of situations.
There is a place for purity, but you need a hell of a setup.
The way out of this is called unit testing. Code like this is just over engineered crap without it. Most of the effort is writing good tests. Show me the test that tells me in a concise way what this is actually supposed to do.
Mostly purity in this context boils down to weird combinations of premature optimization or complete disregard for that. Mostly it doesn't matter of course since code like this runs on trivial amounts of data so giving the garbage collector a little more work with silly stream objects, boxing/unboxing, etc. does not matter. Code like this does not matter, at all. Unless it's wrong. Hence the need for tests. Without tests it's just more likely to end up in tears. With tests, it doesn't really matter what the code looks like as long as the tests pass. If it's convoluted without tests, it's a problem waiting to happen.
Object-oriented programming is a tired gimmick, and JVM tooling and its bloat is so two decades ago. We have better tools now, we should be using them!
If you are utilizing the JVM via Clojure, the situation is not that bad. A lot of Clojure's and Java stdlib's features are now available pre-compiled with GraalVM as a native executable via https://github.com/babashka/babashka, which provides you with instant process start
So the Java ecosystem is kinda living its renaissance now :)
True, but AFAIK, you can't keep your contacts (friends?) list when you delete the account and create a new one just on Messenger. An alternative is to deactivate the account [1] – this effectively removes your account from Facebook, but allows you to keep Messenger with all the contacts. (It probably also keeps other associated accounts, such as Instagram.) Although, it means that the moment you log into Facebook, your account comes back up, with all the relationships that were left off, tags, photos, etc.
Every article/report about online privacy reminds me of how many people I know ignore these facts, don’t know them, or brush them off as they ‘don’t find it harmful’/‘have nothing to hide’. Can anyone give me some suggestions/point to a resource on how to present these facts to the not-tech people I care most about in a way they will actually care?
