Having to use Outlook was a significant contributor to me leaving my last job.

Obviously they need to make exit’s repr method raise a SystemExit

rmdir ./~

I’m grateful to Microsoft for Windows 11 providing me a bunch of free machines to stick in my basement and put Linux on.

About as wide as my oversized fridge.

Can’t wait to get rid of that shit and have something that actually fits in my kitchen.

My experience with Apple has been more like

I credit Apple in many ways for their choice to design their business in a way that their profit motive often aligns with their users’ interests.

Their app store model for iOS is one of the strongest examples of them not doing that though.

Cat people are pretty self-sufficient. Normally food, water and a few cats are all they need, and they’ll come to you for attention. If you have two cat people there’s a good chance of them forming a bonded pair, too. More than two cat people and they’ll often socialise together.

The 747 doesn’t have that bad a safety record. I’m more interested in what random radio transmissions occur from it.

A cat and a bike

They’re already getting that illegally so that wouldn’t change.

This is not how probability works.

Yeah, Steam is pretty much a monopoly. But I haven’t seen what I’d call monopolistic practices from them. It’s just that everyone else appears to fall flat on their faces when trying to make a competing product.

I’m less mad at Steam and Google because there are clear, simple ways to avoid their cuts.

I have no basis to say whether they’re providing a service worth the 30% charge. I’m also less mad at Steam than at Google because they’re being less shady about trying to push people into their store too.

The Reminder bot

While that’s true and what I’m about to say could be legend rather than reality, I grew up being told that giraffes also tend to go to the top of a hill during storms, making them more likely to be struck by lightning.

This also happened to a practicing immigration lawyer: https://bsky.app/profile/nicolemicheroni.bsky.social/post/3lmpvej6vn22t

Kate

I think a better analogy would be that you’re tuning your bike for better performance because the trade-offs of switching to a car are worse than keeping the bike.

It’s all about trade-offs. Here are a few reasons why one might care about performance in their Python code:

1. Performance is often more tied to the code than to the interpreter - an O(n³) algorithm in blazing fast C won’t necessarily perform any better than an O(nlogn) algorithm in Python.
2. Just because this particular Python code isn’t particularly performance constrained doesn’t mean you’re okay with it taking twice as long.
3. Rewriting a large code base can be very expensive and error-prone. Converting small, very performance-sensitive parts of the code to a compiled language while keeping the bulk of the business logic in Python is often a much better value proposition.

These are also performance benefits one can get essentially for free with linter rules.

Anecdotally: in my final year of university I took a computational physics class. Many of my classmates wrote their simulations in C or C++. I would rotate between Matlab, Octave and Python. During one of our labs where we wrote particle simulations, I wrote and ran Octave and Python simulations in the time it took my classmates to write their C/C++ versions, and the two fastest simulations in the class were my Octave and Python ones, respectively. (The professor’s own sim came in third place). The overhead my classmates had dealing with poorly optimised code that caused constant cache misses was far greater than the interpreter overhead in my code (though at the time I don’t think I could have explained why their code was so slow compared to mine).