aes

@aes@programming.dev

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Am I going fucking crazy? (Regarding explicit songs being censored on various music streaming services.)⁩ ⁨⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Could ‘push’, yes, as in, “we mentioned it in passing when rock and roll grandpa wasn’t paying attention, so he wouldn’t throw a hissy fit and withdraw from the service”. Oh, you meant to the labels? Ha ha ha, NO. The labels have basically nuclear option veto powers.

  As for changes, well, updates get delivered all the time, for various reasons. (The scratched Turbonegro album being one frequent flyer.) I think a lot of those are bullshit SEO-like reasons, but it is what it is.

  Which artist appears in most frequent releases? I forget, but I think it’s Elvis. Possibly Johnny Cash. Why? Because some material has gone out of copyright in some jurisdictions, and so people have the idea to upload them again in ‘new’ compilations. (The content team don’t even beat these down personally – that’s machine work)

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Am I going fucking crazy? (Regarding explicit songs being censored on various music streaming services.)⁩ ⁨⁨7⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I worked on exactly this for a while, a long, long time ago. It turns out to be an annoyingly difficult bag of problems. The record companies don’t really care, they sell (sold, I guess) pieces of plastic. (Idk if they fixed it yet, but the same Turbonegro album kept getting sent with the same scratches, kept getting taken down a while later, for years.) So, good luck trusting them to label anything.

  Puritans are so much more aggressive than sane people that making mistakes one way is much more expensive than the other way.

  Anyway, we ended up trying to work out which tracks are actually the same song, (Easy for you, harder for friend computer, yes?) and then if one of them is marked explicit, they all are, unless marked “radio edit” or “clean”, or whatever. If you think about this for a minute, if one track is labeled “radio edit”, maybe the other ones should be marked explicit…

  It’s a deep rabbit hole, is what I’m saying.

  And the people with the pitchforks are never happy.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨GitHub - couchbase/fleece: A super-fast, compact, JSON-equivalent binary data format⁩ ⁨⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  “Appendable” seems like a positive spin on the “truncated YAML-file is frighteningly often valid” problem…

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Tabs are objectively better than spaces - gomakethings.com⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  It was harder to explain why picking on Python for this is dumb, before gotofail… (Not saying that’s what you’re doing, but it feels close, so this is relevant.)

  For whitespace, my rule is this: If any level of indentation depends on the length of any word or name, you’re doing it wrong. If using a more descriptive name causes indentation where previously there was none, that’s fine, but if moving the opening parens causes the interior to be indented more, less so. (Yes, Golang’s structs)

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Why should I use rust (as a Go enthusiast)?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Well, with the newer optional typing, it became def foo(name: Optional[str]) -> Optional[str]: … and now def foo(name: str | None) -> str | None: … (No need to import Optional) It’s quite nice.

  As for Rust, recall that Result is also a very similar union type. I think a lot of the aversions people have had to static typing have mostly just been about poor expressiveness in clunky type systems.