If you talk to people about homelessness, they will readily admit they just don't want to see it. If go to any cheaper grocery store you definitely are rubbing shoulders with people who use foodbanks. Food insecurity doesn't go away just because you have a roof over your head.

The rub is a foodbank in a grocery store will attract the more visible "unreliable access to showers" type of user, which would be unacceptable.

I originally excited by Podman, but ultimately migrated away from it. Friendship ended with Ubuntu and Docker -> CentOS and Podman -> Proxmox + Debian LXC (which has its own irritations but anyway). Off the top of my head:

• Can't attach a containers to multiple networks. Most of my Docker Compose stacks have an Nginx reverse proxy and a network for each service.
• But you can use pods. However since they share the same network interface if you have multiple legacy services that both insist on, say, port 80 they can't be in the same pod. They also don't isolate services, nor can you assert a specific pod is the one listening on a forwarded port.
• Pods also have DNS issues with Nginx. It kept crashing since it couldn't resolve the hostnames of the other containers in the pod, even if they were already running. If you launch a shell inside an Nginx container the other container hostnames resolve fine. I suspect the problem is the container is launched before its behind-the-scenes DNS infrastructure is ready.
• Podman lets you use secrets on normal containers (yay) but if the secret changes you have to recreate the container. Amazing synergy with rotating TLS certificates.
• Endless issues with SELinux and bind mounts. My Nginx container kept crashing because SELinux didn't like the TLS certificate bind mount. This is where I reflected on the endless parade of random issues that I had no interest in solving and finally threw in the towel.

I brought all this up in another community and was told the problem was [paraphrased] "people keep trying to use Podman like they use Docker" - whatever that means. I do like a number of design choices in it, like including the command used to create containers in the metadata, and how it's easy to integrate into SystemD for things like scheduled updates.

Cockpit is pretty slick though, need to install it on my bare metal Debian host.

I disagree with that as a rule of thumb. I'll take writing 1000 lines of code from scratch every time over deciphering 1000 lines of bad code.

However, I do you think are right if limited to the ~100ish lines that fit into an hour sized block of interview time. I suspect the other half of the answer is (good) job postings have largely gotten away from hard language requirements. It's perfectly reasonable to hire someone that will need to familiarize themselves with Go or Python or Typescript or whatever. It's not fair to expect someone to analyze code in a language they haven't used on the spot.

Yeah, they kinda suck and they are brutal to go into cold. Having to grind a bunch of leetcode problems is a burden, particularly if you currently have a job and god forbid a family.

I would still take them over the puzzle questions that used to be popular, or the personality test nonsense that dominates most fields. At least Leetcode problems are reasonably reflective of programming skill. I'll also take them over vague open ended questions - ain't nothing more fun than trying to ramble my way into whatever answer the interviewer is secretly looking for.

Personally, when the day comes when I'm In Charge, I plan on experimenting with more day to day type evaluations. I think there's potential for things like performing a mock code review or having someone plan out a sprint based on a very detailed design document. "Here's an icky piece of code, tell me what it does and what you would do to improve it" seems to have fallen out of style, though it's not clear to me why.

That said, like it or not it's how the game is played and not changing anytime soon. Get on the Grind75 train, or don't and keep failing tech screens.

This might not be what your friend is going for, but I smirked slightly and this is how I interpret it:

I particularly like jokes that take something absurd and launder it through the structure of things that do make sense. Everything in your friend's joke is factually true. It's structured as a logically consistent argument.

And yet it is completely nonsensical. No one has ever thought that windows make something move. It invoked a slightly confused response in me, which is why I found it funny.

It's not a great joke, but I might tell it to feel out someone's sense of humor plus whether they pick up on that I'm doing so. I think the analogy to Windows makes it a weaker joke, but I would give that as an explanation just to mess with someone a little.

More topical references would help if there was a strong commentary aspect to Futurama, but it's never been that kind of show.

The simplest explanation is jokes are the bread and butter of a comedy and they just aren't that great in Hulurama. Having rewatched it recently, Foxurama also leaned heavily on the plot of individual episodes, but so far the plots feel like retreads or just not particularly interesting.

Which now that I think about it, all of this can be said about The Simpsons.

Friction between Snap and AppArmor is to be expected. The corporate sponsor of Snap, Canonical, is well known for their icy relationship with the corporate sponsor of AppArmor, Canonical.

The layoff includes Mary Kirby, who's been a core writer in the Dragon Age franchise since the first game. Saw takes that the layoffs are just eliminating multiplayer positions, but that's not true.

I've long suspected that Dreadwolf will make or break BioWare. Since it's following the same script as Andromeda and Anthem - endless delays, no public progress just lots of b-roll and concept art - I don't think development is going well. ME: Legacy might have bought BioWare some breathing room but I can't interpret this as anything other than death throes for the studio.

BioWare is dead, long live Larian and Spiders?

Likely an attempt to claim there's fewer calories per slice, even though people will just cut it in quarters instead of fifths.

Might be onto something, I've been finding delicious brisket sandwiches outside my house. Even found a knish the other day.

For context, this is leading to my AC unit. While hanging a light above my workbench, I noticed daylight coming in from the wall where there shouldn't be any. It appears a previous owner had pulled back the insulation and forgot to put it back - shudder to think how much money that's costed me over the last two years. Would like a hardier seal than insulation to stop water and mice, but not sure what is required.

This reinforces my belief that online advertising produces a lot of objective data ("how many times was my ad viewed? clicked?") but benefits from not being able to tie that to outcomes companies are actually interested in ("are the ads expanding business?").

A number of years ago I read an analysis on how some large social media site had changed the order of a few important buttons out of the blue. This was likely from A/B testing showing increased engagement, but it was probably just confused users clicking on it. I bet similar things happen all the time in ads, possibly inadvertently. If an A/B change shows increased ad clicks, it's unlikely not to be adopted, even if it's not intentional clicks.