whaleross

For the company it is a tax write off and getting rid of their surplus. They don't care what happens next.

What kind of ghouls are coming up with this bullshit? Speak about selling your soul to Mammon.

I feel like this about Linux news that are YouTube videos and no description text in the post. I don't want to watch your video or podcast. I'm not interested in your broadcasting career. I want to know what was worth being posted about.

I feel like a flock of seagulls

Anybody using obfuscation for securing algorithms is fooling themselves. It can be useful in fringe scenarios when you know and accept the limitations but for general use it is not. There is no obfuscation clever enough that can not be broken down and figured out.

Example - delaying cracking of copy protection for the first few weeks of a game release. It will be cracked eventually though, regardless the obfuscation and protection. Nobody expects it to be secure - but complicated enough to buy some time.

Other example - obfuscating assets loader for your game app to make it slightly harder to steal the graphics for scams and knock offs. It will not stop anybody dedicated to it but it can make the lazy skip it and go for the next game instead. Nobody expects it to be secure, but it might work as a deterrent because the next bicycle has a simpler lock to cut.

Counter example - thinking you're clever by obfuscating your homebrew cryptographic algorithm. Just don't. Use a FOSS crypto library, learn how to secure keys and be done with it. It's not secure or safe in any possible way ever and it is a really bad idea all over.

Consider other streaming services than Spotify, like Deezer or Tidal or Qobuz, that pays the artist better and don't do deceiving garbage like this.

The little death does not risk reincarnation.

Dude, go out for a walk. Enjoy the sun, the wind, the birds and the grass. You are overthinking things that do not exist.

Well, on the other hand. Meat bags can't really do neuron stuff either, despite that is essential for any meat bag operation. Humans are still here though and so are dogs.

Then you do not do Javascript, because it is an interpreted language.

Edit: or Python, or a command line shell, or any CORS, or databases, or... Well idk really what you do use honestly.

Now that you mention it, it is a bit funny how Lemmy is hating LLMs as a code generation tool while also hating on the interpreter for their own hand typed code not running.

It was never intended to run full applications but only the small business scripts and hobbyist homepage stuff that were the thing in the 90s, across inconsistent browsers that were a jungle of hit and miss behaviour where it was preferred that menus keep working even if the mouse effect was not. Anything of scale was expected to be done in Java. Dynamic web pages did not exist and as anything not static was generated server side into a static html file to be rendered on the client.

Anyway, back then it wasn't considered the job of the programming language to hold the hand of the aspiring developer as it is common today. It's not a bad thing that IDE and even compilers and preprocessors try to help you write better code today, but then it simply didn't exist.

JavaScript is from a different time and because it has the hard requirement or backwards compatibility there is no changing it and has not been for thirty years except to add stuff to it.

I think it's just silly to ask the past to keep up with the present. Bad code is not the fault of the language regardless, even though junior devs and even seasoned ones like to think so to protect their ego. I think it is better to accept it, learn from it and roll with it because every single platform and language has their weird quirks anyway.

Signed, old dude that learned programming in 8 bit BASIC and 6502 machine code without an assembler, where code bad enough would freeze your machine that required a cold boot and starting over from your last save that you didn't do.