karlhungus

this is normal enshittification, we just move on to the next shit.

I'm very lazy so I'd probably start by looking at filters on those sites, if i really wanted to tackle this with programming, i'd:

see if there's an api, or rss feed for these sites, if so i'd pull that down with a cron job and do filtering locally with probably regex.

if not i'd scrape the html and pull out the relevant links with whatever the latest html parser is for the language i use (i.e. it used to be beautiful soup for python, but there's i think a new better one).

but as i said i'm rather lazy, and haven't been on the prowl for jobs for some time.

In my experience only kinda, and by convention (up is on), and three-way switches break this (indicator becomes the light itself).

As a parent, this is a parenting/personal issue, fuck off and please spend my money doing useful things (like supporting health care, or housing) not attempting to protect my children.

Could be in vogue and also true

Interviews are a crapshoot, and feedback from them is usually valueless. Good luck to you in your future interviews

No dead cells. risk of rain 2 at 71? nahhh

I hear this quite a bit, and think there's actually a good deal of nuance to it. I've seen places that insisted on comments for everything, and it was silly, a significant number of comments had no value. This made people not read comments, as opposed to other places I've worked with very few comments - when you ran across a comment you gave it more weight (something here was complex, or not as simple as it seemed).

So imo, use comments which can communicate effectively, but use them sparingly for important parts that are complicated, for the rest attempt to communicate with the code itself.

If your product or treatment of customers is so bad they'd go to the trouble to create multiple accounts to give you bad reviews. Maybe you deserve it.

Maybe just maybe they are saying review bombing but they just mean bad reviews. There is no evidence in that article that stream has detected review bombing meaning single person or bot flooding their page with bad reviews.

Giving someone a bad review is stating ng your opinion, telling others to do the same is more of the same, just like you've done here.

The reason for crunch is oversupply of employees who want to work in the industry or product. This doesn't happen where employees value their time, or there is a undersupply of talent.

Games are not cheap when compared to other entertainment, and they involve the same magnitude of costs, these are businesses and crunch is exploiting talent.

There is a bad actor here, but it's not the customer.

review bombing them and calling for boycotts because they raised their prices is fucking bullshit.

Just like you've stated your opinion here, they also can and should do that.

I wish every gamer had to work through crunch on at least one game

This is silly, developers shouldn't put up with crunch, but the blame for this doesn't lie with the customers, but instead with the corporation exploiting them.

You seem to be attacking the customer, and commiserating with the employees, but completely ignoring that somewhere all the value of the enterprise is being extracted. All in favour of status quo, this is terrible for everyone who actually works on the game, or pays for the game.

Probably my quotes implied sarcasm, what i should have said is there are so many hats that a "software developer" or "software engineer" is really really broad like by the wikipedia definition at my current company we typically call those "principal engineers", or "principal architect"; i've also seen them called staff software engineers.

Likely it's super domain dependent; the failure cost with a satellite's or hardware cost you the business. Where with a website the MTTR can be very small. So a large oversight isn't quite as needed, as the cost is so small.