My manager started a company and I was his first employee, he literally started it because he wanted to make use of my talent.

So one day I finished my project on Friday and took in advance Monday and Tuesday off. Went back Wednesday to find my manager angry like "you didn't finish your project, you costed us money with our client company (a big ass famous one) I am putting you on probation and you could probably get fired if you don't get yourself together" and he said that my colleague had to do my whole work that I supposedly didn't do.
So I went to the code and checked. And I found that what my colleague did was re write my code in a different structure and pretended like he did everything and did do anything.
Got passed off so I wrote an email to my manager with the commits and links to them and their builds and made sure it's well explained, and titled the email "resignation letter" with me expressing at the end how angry I am and informing about my resignation.
Later on he replied saying it was a misunderstanding and there was lack of communication and he could give me I raise.
I insisted.
One week later I got hired by the client company and suddenly I was sitting on the other side of the meeting table. And it felt so damn good.

Doot doot.

My day: Eight lines of refactoring around a 10-character fix for a minor production issue. Some tests. Lots of bloody phone calls and conference calls filled with me laughing and getting talked over. Why? Read on.

My boss's day: Trying very very hard to pin random shit on me (and failing because I'm awesome and fuck him). Six hours of drama and freaking out and chewing and yelling that the whole system is broken because of that minor issue. No reading, lots of misunderstanding, lots of panic. Three-way called me specifically to bitch out another coworker in front of me. (Coworker wasn't really in the wrong.) Called a contractor to his house for testing. Finally learned that everything works perfectly in QA (duh, I fixed it hours ago). Desperately waited for me to push to prod. Didn't care enough to do production tests afterwards.

My day afterwards: hey, this Cloudinary transform feature sounds fun! Oh look, I'm done already. Boo. Ask boss for update. Tests still aren't finished. Okay, whatever. Time for bed.

what a joke.

Oh, I talked to the accountant after all of this bullshit happened. Apparently everyone that has quit in the last six years has done so specifically because of the boss. Every. single. person.

I told him it was going to happen again.

I also told him the boss is a druggie with a taste for psychedelics. (It came up in conversation. Absolutely true, too.) It's hilarious because the company lawyer is the accountant's brother.

So stupid.

Misunderstanding is like running ftp server on port 80!
Ftp responses for http request!
In real life it happens like this

Dear outsourced developers. Don't send me your private SSH key by email. I don't need it, it allows me to access anything else you can access pretending I'm you, and it shows a misunderstanding of how SSH keys work. 🤦🏻‍♂️

Customer is always right.....

Committed to sustainable productivity..

Misunderstanding between the IT Department Staff member and the Finance Department Staff member in one of the establishments...

User: Hi, our printer is not working.

IT Service: What is wrong with it?

User: The mouse is jammed.

IT Service: Mouse? Are you sure it’s a printer, as they don’t come with a mouse?

User: Do you think I’m stupid? I’m telling you it’s the printer!

IT Service: I'm telling you, it can’t be the printer! They don’t have a mouse!

User: Oh really?... Mmmmm... I’ll send you a picture.

Scroll down...
. . . . .. .
. . . . . .
. . . . .
. . . .
. . .
. .
.
.
.

The customer is always right.
Listen to him/her and believe what he/she says.

Don’t jump into conclusions!

Dev: “Ughh..look at this –bleep- code! When I execute the service call, it returns null, but the service received a database error.”
Me: “Yea, that service was written during a time when the mentality was ‘Why return a service error if the client can’t do anything about it?’”
Dev: “I would say that’s a misunderstanding of that philosophy.”
Me: “I would say it’s a perfectly executed example of a deeply flawed philosophy.”
Dev: “No, the service should just return something that tells the client the operation failed.”
Me: “They did. It was supposed to return a valid result, and the developer indicated a null response means the operation failed. How you deal with the null response is up to you.”
Dev: “That is stupid. How am I supposed to know a null response means the operation failed?”
Me: “OK, how did you know the operation failed?”
Dev: “I had to look at the service error logs.”
Me: “Bingo.”
Dev: “This whole service is just a –bleep-ing mess. There are so many things that can go wrong and the only thing the service returns is null when the service raises an exception.”
Me: “OK, what should the service return?”
Dev: ”I don’t know. Error 500 would be nice.”
Me: “Would you know what to do with error 500?”
Dev: ”Yea, I would look at the error log”
Me: “Just like you did when the service returned null?”
<couple of seconds of silence>
Dev: “I don’t know, it’s a –bleep-ing mess.”
Me: “You’re in the code, change it.”
Dev: “Ooohhh no, not me. The whole thing will have to be re-written. It should have been done correctly the first time. If we had time to do code reviews, I would have caught this –bleep- before the service was deployed.”
Me: “Um, you did.”
<a shocked look from Dev>
Dev: “What…no, I’ve never seen this code.”
Me: “I sat next to Chuck when you were telling him he needed to change the service to return null if an exception was raised. I remember you telling him specifically to pop-up an error dialog ‘Service request failed’ to the user when the service returned null.”
Dev: “I don’t remember any of that.”
Me: “Well, Chuck did. He even put it in the check-in comments. See…”
<check in comments stated Dev’s code review and dictated the service return null on exceptions>
Dev: “Hmm…I guess I did. –bleep- are you a –bleep-ing elephant? You –bleep-ing remember everything.”

<what I wanted to say>
No, I don’t remember everything, but I remember all the drive-by <bleep>-ed up coding philosophies you tried to push to the interns and we’re now having all kinds of problems I spend waaaaay too much time fixing.
<what I said, and lied a little bit>
Me: “No, I was helping Nancy last week troubleshoot the client application last week with the pop-up error. Since the service returned a null, she didn’t know where to begin to look for the actual error.”
Dev: “Oh.”

I’m so mad I’m fighting back anger tears. This is a long rant and I apologize but I’m so freaking mad.

So a few weeks ago I was asked by my lead staff person to do a data analysis project for the director of our dept. It was a pretty big project, spanning thousands of users. I was excited because I love this sort of thing and I really don’t have anything else to do. Well I don’t have access to the dataset, so I had to get it from my lead and he said he’d do it when he had a chance. Three days later he hadn’t given it to me yet. I approach him and he follows me to my desk, gives me his login and password to login to the secure freaking database, then has me clone it and put it on my computer.

So, I start working on it. It took me about six hours to clean the database, 2 to set up the parameters and plan of attack, and two or three to visualize the data. I realized about halfway through that my lead wasn’t sure about the parameters of the analysis, and I mentioned to him that the director had asked for more information than what he was having me do. He tells me he will speak with director.

So, our director is never there, so I give my lead about a week to speak with her, in the mean time I finish the project to the specifications that the director gave. I even included notes about information that I would need to make more accurate predictions, to draw conclusions, etc. It was really well documented.

Finally, exasperated, and with the project finished but just sitting on my computer for a week, I approached my director on a Saturday when I was working overtime. She confirmed that I needed to what she said in the project specs (duh), and also mentioned she needed a bigger data set than what I was working with if we had one. She told me to speak to my lead on Monday about this, but said that my work looked great.

Monday came and my lead wasn’t there so I spoke with my supervisor and she said that what I was using was the entire dataset, and that my work looked great and I could just send it off. So, at this point 2/3 of my bosses have seen the project, reviewed it, told me it was great, and confirmed that I was doing the right thing.

I sent it off to the director to disseminate to the appropriate people. Again, she looked at it and said it was great.

A week later (today) one of the people that the project was sent to approaches me and tells me that i did a great job and thank you so much for blah blah blah. She then asks me if the dataset I used included blahblah, and I said no, that I used what was given to me but that I’d be happy to go in and fix it if given the necessary data.

She tells me, “yeah the director was under the impression that these numbers were all about blahblah, so I think there was some kind of misunderstanding.” And then implied that I would not be the one fixing the mistake.

I’m being taken off of the project for two reasons: 1. it took to long to get the project out in the first place,
2. It didn’t even answer the questions that they needed answered.

I fucking told them in the notes and ALL THROUGH THE VISUALIZATIONS that I needed additional data to compare these things I’m so fucking mad. I’m so mad.

Most of the tech YouTubers are really noob engineers.

Joma was a data scientist. He is an L3 engineer at Google and he hasn't done much during the last 1 year based on his internal stats.

I saw tech leads stats while he was at Google and that dude did nothing during his time. I'm sure he was an IC before he became a lead.

Clement talks about system design bull shit but he's a math major who worked on some angular front end while he was at Google. Basically his experience in tech is mostly involving using mat-button and mat-input. He also quit FB in a month.

Listening to tech lead gives me cancer. That guy was also some front end/ mobile engineer. I don't think any less of mobile engineers but tech leads acts as if he built some large scale systems at Google and FB. His opinion about react native shows how much of a noob he is. He also talked about docker in one of his video which showed he had some fundamental misunderstanding of what docker is. In his courses, he struggles to explain simple algorithms.

I don't know how these people have the courage to claim themselves as some sort of experts in the field when they are extreme noobs. They also sell some shady courses and are robbing innocent college kids.

One thing they all do well is talk. Which I give them 10/10.

No Google translate, I don't want you to translate my Lorem Ipsum. You are misunderstanding what I'm trying to do here. Thanks anyway.

Misunderstanding ¯\( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)/¯

This happened via mail thread today.

Boss: we need this new brilliant feature I just made up and running asap! Top priority, it has to be done well, for my reputation is on the line!

Me: *looks at the specifics* 'kay, looks easy enough, this evening max and it will be ready. I just nees some extra info about what kind of data validations (I speak no accountant) are needed, and some other details (a total of 3 questiona).

B: Sure! Remember, it needs to be perfect, as my reputation is at stake. Call me on the phone and I'll give you the details!

M: Can't you answer via mail? Thua way both me and the other devs will have clewr guidelines

B: Just call me! Why do you need it to be written down? It's faster this way!

...Fine. I'll keep asking until you're ready to give me a written answer to my questions. No way I'll take security details via phone for something you want in production this evening. No chance in Hell I'll take responsibility for "misunderstanding" what you said on the phone. Why does it always has to be like that?

Is this just a subtle misunderstanding, or is my Google assistant getting passive aggressive?

Dogecoin hit USD $0.40 recently, which means it's time for the Crypto Rant.

TL;DR: Dogecoin is shit and is logically guaranteed to eventually fall unless it is fundamentally changed.

===========================

If you know how Crypto works under the hood, you can skip to the next section. If you don't, here's the general xyz-coin formula:

Money is sent via transactions, which are validated by *anybody*.

Since transactions are validated by anybody, the system needs to make sure you're not fucking it up on purpose.

The current idea (that most coins use today) is called proof-of-work. In short, you're given an extremely difficult task, and the general idea is you wouldn't be willing to do that work if you were just going to fuck up the system.

For validating these transactions, you are rewarded twofold:

1) You are given a fixed-size prize of the currency from the system itself. This is how new currency is introduced, or "minted" if you prefer.
2) You are given variable-size and user-determined prize called "transaction fees", but it could be more accurately called a "bribe" since it's sole purpose is to entice miners to add YOUR transaction to their block.

This system of validation and reward is called mining.

===========================

This smaller section compares the design o f BTC to Dogecoin - which will lead to my final argument

In BTC, the time between blocks (chunks of data which record transactions and are added to the chain, hence blockchain) is ten minutes. Every ten minutes, BTC transactions are validated and new Bitcoins are born.

In Dogecoin, the time between blocks is only one minute. In Theory, this means that mining Dogecoin is about ten times easier, because the system expects you to be able to solve the proof of work in an average of one minute.

The huge difference between BTC and Doge is the block reward (Fixed amount; new coins minted). The block reward for BTC is somewhat complicated compared to Doge: It started as 50 BTC per block and every 4 years it is halved ("the great halving"). Right now it's 6.25 BTC per block. Soon, the block reward will be almost nothing until BTC hits it's max of 21 million bitcoins "minted".

Dogecoin reward is 10,000 coins per block. And it will be that way for the end of time - no maximum, no great halving. And remember, for every 1 BTC block mined, 10 Doge blocks are mined.

===========================

Bitcoin and Dogecoin are now the two most popular coins in pop culture. What makes me angry is the widespread misunderstanding of the differences between the two. It is likely that most investors buy Dogecoin thinking they're getting in "early" because it's so cheap. They think it's cheap because it isn't as popular as Bitcoin yet. They're wrong. It's cheap because of what's outlined in section two of this rant.

Dogecoin is actually not very far off Bitcoin. Do the math: there's a bit over 100 billion Dogecoin in circulation (130b). There's about 20 million BTC. Calculate their total CURRENT values:

130b * $0.40 = 52b
20m * $60k = 1.2t

...and Doge is rising much, much faster than BTC because of the aforementioned lack of understanding.

The most common thing I hear about Doge is that "nobody expects it to reach Bitcoin levels" (referring to being worth 60k a fucking coin). They don't realize that if Doge gets to be worth just $10 a coin, it will not just reach Bitcoin levels but overtake Bitcoin in value ($1.3T).

===========================

It's worth highlighting that Dogecoin is literally designed to fail. Since it lacks a cap on new coins being introduced, it's just simple math that no matter how much Doge rises, it will eventually be worthless. And it won't take centuries, remember that 100k new Doge are mined EVERY TEN MINUTES. 1,440 minutes in a day * 10K per minute is 14.4 million new coins per day. That's damn near every Bitcoin to ever exist mined every day in Dogecoin

This happened when I finished highschool.

I was looking for a programming related career at university, and I had two options: Computer systems engineering or Software engineering. I commented this to my mom.

Me: Mom, this university offers Software engineering. The thing is that the campus is 1 hour from the city and it’s a new career, so I don’t know if it’s a good idea or not.
Mom: Why Software engineering? Don’t you want to be a developer?
Me: Yes, that’s why I was thinking of taking Software engineering
...
Mom: Is not “Software” what is inside the computer? (Inside the chasis on desktop computers)

I started laughing so hard 😂 and, of course, I ran away

Planning.
- Sales people: we will deploy and install 100 customers by the end of the month.
Meaning: 100 it's impossibile, we want actually do 50, but we set a high target so people will sweat their ass off. But we don't tell them the truth.

- Tech people: no way, we will deploy and install no more than 25!
Meaning: we could do 100 but we would die. We will guarantee 25, but since we are good we will optimise the workflow and maybe we will make it to 50. But we don't want to create expectations.

Big misunderstanding arise if these two language are used in the same meeting.

At least if I'm in the meeting as technical people

How many times do I have explain the rookiees in java developer team, that implementing an interface is not inheritance. You are not actually inheriting any member - variable or method or otherwise. You are just getting a skeleton, according to which you have write your class. THAT IS NOT INHERITANCE.

So MULTIPLE INHERITANCE does not exist in java. Period.

There is no way around it. Stop misunderstanding stuff and passing that misconceptions to newbies.

Most upsetting interview rejection?

Back when I graduated college, I did the usual rounds of interviews with insurance companies, banks, various other institutional businesses set up by the college's career center.

One local insurance company interview I thought went great. Usual 'Where do you see yourself in 5 years?' type questions, told her about my job history, very high level type stuff.

Couple of weeks later I get a letter in the mail and after the usual 'It was great to meet you blah blah blah', it ended with
'State Farm will never consider you for a position with our company.'

Never?! My then fiance (now wife) yelled "WHAT DID YOU DO?!!!" and I racked my brain for anything I might have said or done. The HR lady was attractive, but I didn't stare at any body parts and I didn't make any weird sexual advances (I was nervous enough without *that* going thru my mind).
The college career center floods the local companies with graduates and I was #5 in the waiting room that day. My only guess was they got me confused with someone else.

My fiance wanted me to call them immediately to straighten out any misunderstanding, but I knew what was done, was done. It's not like they would realize "Oh, that's right, it was Bob that kept looking at Karen's breasts, not you...come work for us!" Besides, why would I want to work someplace that didn't know/care who I was?

How do you guys/girls explain to potential new customers that you can perfectly work in a structured business environment and follow the rules, but also that you're assertive enough to oppose desicions being made based on bias, misunderstanding, fanboyism, or grave stupidity.

I just got informed from a freelance position that they would have hired me if it were not for my 'rebellious nature towards customers'

I don't oppose customers, i oppose stupidity unfounded.
Example from experience
> me working in a helodesk support position, all windows computer.
> new mgr comes into office, is a douche and complete mac fanboy
> wants all computers that are FINALLY working decent for some time in the entire department replaced with mac's... Back at 2010.
> whole team, even disliking microsoft themselves, are telling mgr that's a bad, dangerously dumb idea, expensive too, different OS, different software mgmt making, back then integration microsoft and apple was beyond diarhea... Several other issues the senior devs and admins pointed out

>mgr: 'but aple is soh much better, like a billion times better, hurrduurrrrr'
His decision passed somehow to the board..
> All stations from our customers get changed...we don't get a single machine to try out problems because overspending
> we are most of the time unable to help out customers because we still have pc's...
> mgr asks team why performance drops after 1 month
> we compared performance graph with his starting date of mgr, see clear drop after mgr's plan implemented...
> board stilll stands by mgr, gets praise for 'bold changes in the company', but appears to be some associate's son
> two main seniors leave after 15 years of employment, in three months, 80% of staff leaves.
> we canr fix the problems, we are not dev's , we get shit from all sides, i was still a junior in the industry so i worked as a slave inside that job.
> eventually get fired due to 'bad performance'
> mgr loses entire team... 'Hey why don't we outsource this dept to south africa, it's a lot cheaper! '

now that company is an it hellhouse where everyone get clinically depressed from sitting atbtheir station...
This is what i wish to oppose!

How to make that clear!

For the first two years of college or so, my dad would often ask when I was going to start taking apart computers in classes.

"Dad, we don't do that."
....
"No, I'm learning about the software aspect."
...
"Never."

The "stochastic parrot" explanation really grinds my gears because it seems to me just to be a lazy rephrasing of the chinese room argument.

The man in the machine doesn't need to understand chinese. His understanding or lack thereof is completely immaterial to whether the program he is *executing* understands chinese.

It's a way of intellectually laundering, or hiding, the ambiguity underlying a person's inability to distinguish the process of understanding from the mechanism that does the understanding.

The recent arguments that some elements of relativity actually explain our inability to prove or dissect consciousness in a phenomenological context, especially with regards to outside observers (hence the reference to relativity), but I'm glossing over it horribly and probably wildly misunderstanding some aspects. I digress.

It is to say, we are not our brains. We are the *processes* running on the *wetware of our brains*.

This view is consistent with the understanding that there are two types of relations in language, words as they relate to real world objects, and words as they relate to each other. ChatGPT et al, have a model of the world only inasmuch as words-as-they-relate-to-eachother carry some information about the world as a model.

It is to say while we may find some correlates of the mind in the hardware of the brain, more substrate than direct mechanism, it is possible language itself, executed on this medium, acts a scaffold for a broader rich internal representation.

Anyone arguing that these LLMs can't have a mind because they are one-off input-output functions, doesn't stop to think through the implications of their argument: do people with dementia have agency, and sentience?
This is almost certain, even if they forgot what they were doing or thinking about five seconds ago. So agency and sentience, while enhanced by memory, are not reliant on memory as a requirement.

It turns out there is much more information about the world, contained in our written text, than just the surface level relationships. There is a rich dynamic level of entropy buried deep in it, and the training of these models is what is apparently allowing them to tap into this representation in order to do what many of us accurately see as forming internal simulations, even if the ultimate output of that is one character or token at a time, laundering the ultimate series of calculations necessary for said internal simulations across the statistical generation of just one output token or character at a time.

And much as we won't find consciousness by examining a single picture of a brain in action, even if we track it down to single neurons firing, neither will we find consciousness anywhere we look, not even in the single weighted values of a LLMs individual network nodes.

I suspect this will remain true, long past the day a language model or other model merges that can do talk and do everything a human do intelligence-wise.

Question - is this meaningful or is this retarded?

if

2*3 = 6
2*2 = 4
2*1 = 2
2*0 = 0
2*-1 = -2

then why doesnt this work?

6/3 = 2
6/2 = 3
6/1 = 6
6/0 = 0
6/-1 = -6

if n/0 is forbidden and 1/n returns the inverse of n, why shouldn't zero be its own inverse?

If we're talking "0" as in an infinitely precise definition of zero, then 1/n (where n is arbitrarily close to 0), then the result is an arbitrarily large answer, close to infinite, because any floating point number beneath zero (like an infinitely precise approximation of zero) when inverted, produces a number equal to or greater than 1.

If the multiplicative identity, 1, covers the entire set of integers, then why shouldn't division by zero be the inverse of the multiplicative identity, excluding the entire set? It ONLY returns 0, while anything n*1 ONLY returns n.
This puts even the multiplicative identity in the set covered by its inverse.

Ergo, division by zero produces either 0 or infinity. When theres an infinity in an formula, it sometimes indicates theres been
some misunderstanding or the system isn't fully understood. The simpler approach here would be to say therefore the answer is
not infinity, but zero. Now 'simpler' doesn't always mean "correct", only more elegant.

But if we represent the result of a division as BOTH an integer and mantissa
component, e.x

1.234567 or 0.1234567,

i.e. a float, we can say the integer component is the quotient, and the mantissa
is the remainder.

Logically it makes sense then that division by zero is equivalent to taking the numerator, and leaving it "undistributed".
I.e. shunting it to the remainder, and leaving the quotient as zero.

If we treat this as equivalent of an inversion, we can effectively represent the quotient from denominators of n/0 as 1/n

Meaning even 1/0 has a representation, it just happens to be 0.000...

Therefore

(n * (n/0)) = 1

the multiplicative identity

because

(n* (n/0)) == (n * ( 1/n ))

People who math. Is this a yea or nay in your book?

So a recruiter from an MNC recently contacted me for Python job application. She saw my profile and resume on LinkedIn and after reading about my projects she initially thought I have a good industry experience. As soon as I cleared her misunderstanding, she went from "when can you join?" to "sorry, I think I'll have to talk to my manager" in less than 2 seconds.

Talk about underrated jobs

So this happened some years ago:

The phone rings and as soon as I pick it up some fast talking sales rep begins his spiel.

"Good afternoon my name is [don't remember, calling him 'jigglybum'] and we have a device that you plug into your phone line and it will allow you to make free international calls over the internet. It's real easy to set up and you can have it on us for the first three months absolutely free, if you could just confirm your address..."

"Don't want it."

"I'm sorry sir but I think you're throwing away a massive opportunity here we're offering you free international calls."

"No you're not. You're offering me a free trial of some sort of VoIP hardware."

"We yes, but it's free for the first three months and..."

"We also don't make international calls."

"That maybe true sir but with this box you could."

"I'm really not interested in your product."

"I don't think you fully understand all the benefits..."

*there's a clicking noise followed by a dial tone for a second and a new voice*

"Hi, I'm the supervisor for 'jigglybum' and I think perhaps he is having difficulty explaining what it is that we are trying to give you here..."

"Listen to me, from what I have understood you are offering to send us a VOIP hardware device that directly connects to our broadband and facilitates international calls, and presumably any calls for that matter on a three month trial which after will presumably have a subscription fee, have I had any difficulty understanding the nature of the device and terms of use?"

"Well, no sir, that's a very accurate description, so if you could just confirm your address for me..."

"NO! As you have just admitted there was no misunderstanding about what your product is or what it does. There seems to be a real misunderstanding on your part on the concept of 'no'. We don't want this product, we don't need the product and if we want to make VOIP calls, we have Skype!"

"Ok sir, goodbye."

This is, to my knowledge the only and only time that a supervisor in a call centre has wanted to talk to ME.

Motherfucker, do you even review your own code, never mind getting anyone else to do it?

"Hi" randomly added on a new line in the middle of a switch block, a syntax error, as the only change in a file?

Breaking two methods by misunderstanding which database object a variable identifies- but making no other change to those functions? And not adding permissions checks to the new API methods you added in that file?

Overwriting the email template that goes out to users who were added straight to the CRM, by reusing the same file for a template for users that have been invited to an event?

Adding your new fields to the old CRM sync code, again leaving me to figure it out, thereby leaving users' changes likely to be overwritten every morning?

And pushing this to master, supposedly tested, without a heads-up?

How often does your mum need to buy you a new box of crayons? Because these ones are chewed to pieces.

Suck my balls. Or rather don't, you probably don't know you're not meant to use your teeth.

Maybe I'm severely misunderstanding set theory. Hear me out though.

Let f equal the set of all fibonacci numbers, and p equal the set of all primes.

If the density of primes is a function of the number of *multiples* of all primes under n,
then the *number of primes* or density should shrink as n increases, at an ever increasing rate
greater than the density of the number of fibonacci numbers below n.

That means as n grows, the relative density of f to p should grow as well.
At sufficiently large n, the density of p is zero (prime number theorem), not just absolutely, but relative to f as well. The density of f is therefore an upper limit of the density of p.

And the density of p given some sufficiently large n, is therefore also a lower limit on the density of f.

And that therefore the density of p must also be the upper limit on the density of the subset of primes that are Fibonacci numbers.

WHICH MEANS at sufficiently large values of n, there are either NO Fibonacci primes (the functions diverge), and therefore the set of Fibonacci primes is *finite*, OR the density of primes given n in the prime number theorem
*never* truly reaches zero, meaning the primes are in fact infinite.

Proving the Fibonacci primes are infinite, therefore would prove that the prime number line ends (fat chance). While proving the primes are infinite, proves the Fibonacci primes are finite in quantity.

And because the number of primes has been proven time and again to be infinite, as far back as 300BC,the Fibonacci primes MUST be finite.

QED.

If I've made a mistake, I'd like to know.

Dijkstra 1988: "Unfathomed misunderstanding is further revealed by the term 'software maintenance', as a result of which many people continue to believe that programs —and even programming languages themselves— are subject to wear and tear. Your car needs maintenance too, doesn't it?"
npm 2018: "Naaaah!"

Engineering manager and I have a chat last Friday about some working performant code that needs to be refactored for future reusability. Not my favorite stuff but ok, let’s do it. We talk about things VERBALLY, one way of doing it, then another way. She’s in a rush to her next meeting and has to go. I feel very clear on what she wants and how it needs to happen.

After the call I do some thinking and I give her the estimate and brief her my plan. I tell her exactly the way it’s going to be done. She says do it and gives me her sign off.

I submit my MR today. And then she says why I didn’t do it another way. A more generalized way. And “the way we talked about.”

And I ask her if she can explain her way bc there is obviously some misunderstanding. And she proceeds to zero in on some functions I wrote and say how they are not generalized enough and how it’s basically the same as what we had before (but it’s actually a much different design). I patiently listen and at some point she abruptly says she’s out of time and needs to go to a meeting. I say I still don’t understand what she wants. Then she says that she will implement it bc I still don’t understand and she has no more time to explain. I feel pretty bad.

I suggest next time she can show me on zoom whiteboard, just anything visual and not auditory to make sure things are clear and we are on the same page.

She concludes that management has directed us to come to the office more so I need to come in so we can do in person white-boarding.

This whole thing feels unnecessary. We’ve never had this issue before. It seems like either some intentional plot to get me to come into the office more often or terrible communication skills and a lack of priority on my managers part. Like can you just white board your ideas for 5 minutes?!?! There are many tools to do this digitally!

The thing is I still don’t know where the communication gap is bc I still don’t know what she wants. Keep in mind all this fuss is over three cards of text on a webpage.

This is my first job in industry. How do managers normally communicate engineering ideas? And what are the best ways over zoom? And in person?

I noticed here there is not a culture of whiteboarding or pair programming.

It’s on the days like these I question what I’m doing here…

Glad that I've worked about 2½ days on an angular component, with all the struggles, brainstorming and meticulous care for "good" and "readable" code, just to find out that I misunderstood the requirements. Had to completely rewrite it...

Working on a game in Unity for a school project, spent several hours trying to implement a feature... successfully implemented it... only to realize that the feature does something very different than I thought it did.

I thought LoadSceneMode.Additive loaded scenes into memory in the background so I could just switch to them for faster load times... nope, it loads the scenes and just stacks them on top of each other or something like that... Unless I'm still misunderstanding...

There are 10 types of people that understand binary - those that do and then those that have varying levels of misunderstanding on a scale of 1 - 9.

It was more of an inner rage.
A client's manager was trying to getting rid off of me as soon as he could(budget cutting from their client, but still), so he asked my team lead any negative or pity feedback on any issue or misunderstanding that I encountered during work and he was using that as an excuse to tell my agency that I should leave.

Fine, I thought. He's all hot raging air style guy, he can't stand someone that's fine with his character.

But after leaving (2 days earlier than said before even) and when I received the income next month I realised that something was off, and guess what?

That DEEPSHIT refused to pay 6 out of 12 last working days there. So my agency argued with them but can't do shit because they're the "paying client" and the negative sentiment was redirected at me, for making them almost loose that client because of my behaviour.

FUCK THAT PRICK, he touched where I was never touched in my career, stealing from my work and pokets!

What a clown world.

Need some advice here.

So hello everyone! I recently moved abroad for work, for the sake of the experience and the excitement of learning how developers in Latin America tackle specific problems. To my surprise, the dev team is actually composed solely of Europeans and Americans.

I work for a relatively new startup with an ambitious goal. I love the drive everyone has, but my major gripe is with my team lead. He's adverse to any change, and any and all proposals made to improve quality of throughput are shot down in flames. Our stack is a horrendous mess patched together with band-aids, nothing is documented, there are NO unit tests for our backend and the same goes for our frontend. The team has been working on a database/application migration for about a month now, which I find ridiculous because the entire situation could have been avoided by following very rudimentary DevOps practices (which I'm shunned for mentioning). I should also add that for whatever reason containerization and microservices are also taboo, which I find hillarious because of our currently convoluted setup with elastic beanstalk and the the constant complaints between our development environment and production environments differing too much.

I've been tasked with managing a Wordpress site for the past 3 weeks, hardly what I would consider exciting. I've written 6 pages in the past two weeks so our marketing team can move off of squarespace to save some money and allow us more control. Due to the shit show that is our "custom theme" I had to write these pages in a manner that completely disregard existing style rules by disabling them entirely on these pages. Now, ironically they would like to change the blog's base theme but this would invertedly cause other pages created before I arrived to simply not work, which means I would have to rewrite them.

Before I took the role of writing an entire theme from scratch and updating these existing pages to work adequately, I proposed moving to a headless wordpress setup. In which case we could share assets in a much more streamline manner between our application and wordpress site and unify our styles. I was shot down almost immediately. Due to a grave misunderstanding of how wordpress works, no one else on the team seems to understand just how easy it is to fetch data from wordpress's api.

In any event, I also had a tech meeting today with developers from partner companies and realized no one knew what the fuck they were talking about. The greater majority of these self proclaimed senior developers are actually considered junior developers in the United States. I actually recoiled at the thought that I may have made a great mistake leaving the United States to look a great tech gig.

I mean no disrespect to Latin America, or any European countries, I've met some really incredible developers from Russia, the Ukraine, Italy, etc. in the past and I'm certainly not trying to make any blanket statements. I just want to know what everyone thinks, if I should maybe move back to the states and header over to the bay/NY. I'm from the greater Boston area, where some really great stuff is going on but I guess I also wanted a change of scenery.

I’m feeling a bit stuck at work recently. I have a new department head and he keeps periodically asking me to do things that are very much not the normal responsibility of my role. These are always very simple things, things I am certainly capable of doing, but should fall outside of my purview. We even have documented methodologies indicating this sort of thing is not the sort of thing I’m expected to be responsible for. The trouble is, I’m not sure if when he’s asking me to do this it’s because he’s still new and not completely up to speed on who does what, or if this is a situation where he is The Boss and if he’s telling me to do it then now it is my responsibility, if not permanently, at least on these specific occasions. I’m also disinclined to just run with it without saying anything because then it really will become my responsibility, and there are good reasons why it currently is not.

I am having difficulty thinking of a way to bring this up that doesn’t sound like I’m refusing to do it. On the one hand, it’s not my job, but I also know that going around saying “that’s not my job” is not appropriate. The situation is not quite that I don’t have the authority to do the task, but that’s closer to the type of reasoning for why my role isn’t responsible for the thing, and it’s always restricted to people in a different role. Part of the internal rationale was a sort of “too many cooks in the kitchen” situation in the past, but there are also other logical reasons why staff in my role are not intended to be involved.

I’m also hesitant to push back at all since I can’t tell if the boss is coming from a place of not knowing or one of reassigning. I don’t want to seem difficult (but also reallllly don’t want this added to my plate). I don’t know the new department head well enough to guess whether it’s more likely a misunderstanding vs a change in policy. I’m struggling with finding the words for how to bring it up without sounding like I am saying “that’s not my job”. Is this the sort of thing that is better handled in the moment, or waiting for a time separate from when he’s making the request to talk about it more generally? Help!

The requirement says "last day". What they really mean is "last business day"

I been doing a online course and they provide a exercise to do in Jupyter notebook.

I notice that the exercise they wanted us to do this time is too complex. After finishing the exercise I submit it for review.

I thought I am doing an exercise but I had actually done an assignment and submit it :(

Lucky I pass that assignment. It is the worst misunderstanding I have done during my student life.

Hate it when clients told you a specific requirement but then changes it the last minutes. You can't justify or argue. Can't do nothing about it but only follow. Just a high paid slave.
Example:
Client-verbal: background color of all 5 pages
Me-with email verification: ok. I will bg color of all pages will be red based from our last meeting.
Client email reply: ok
After a few days
Client: I think we have misunderstanding. What I meant was 4 pages red only. The 5th page should be maroon.
Me in my mind: wtf. Of course I can't argue but just agree and follow. The demo is near and he'll just inform the last minute. I will not win this argument.

Also, there are no acceptance criterias in the user story.

if anyone is familiar with immer js or immutable js:

if the producer copies the base state to nextState, and nextState is a const, doesnt that defeat the purpose?

I mean you're going for immutability, which is great for say an undo function, or for finding bugs, but what are you doing with all these immutable values now hanging around in memory?

I assume each new state returned is being pushed onto an array? (because you cant stuff it into nextState because nextState is immutable).

Wont this lead to memory usage increasing over a user session, the longer the session lasts?

I feel like I'm misunderstanding some core concept here.

edit: also what the hell is structural sharing?

When I bought something second hand, I had a small chat with them and got to know that they need a new website for their small business. They told me they paid 800€ to an agency that didn't deliver anything - I suppose there's some misunderstanding but I don't wanna get involved in that).

I told them I could do it, but it's not really my field and I'm not sure if I want the trouble. I made clear I'd expect to be paid, I'd need to think about the amount..

Requirements should simple enough, static website can do. Nothing fancy really. They might even be able to DIY with a shitty website builder.. Needs to be hosted and working email. One red flag is the current situation regarding domain ownership because the former maintainer died...

Anyway I suppose this could be a nice side gig for beer money, with the initial setup paid decently plus a yearly fee for maintenance/hosting.

I don't wanna rip them off but also I don't wanna work a second job for pennies.. idk something like 500€ once + 150€/year would probably be ok? (incl. costs for domain/hosting/email)

Its everyones favorite time again. Wisecrack's 8th grade hoborants about mathematics.

Lets start with the example

a=89
b=223
p=a*b=19847

If

(1/(5/p))/b = 17.8

and naturally

p/5 =3969.4

3969.4/b = 17.8

What I find interesting is that...

p/17.8 = 1115.0

..for any product and factors (given two factors), the result will always be an integer.

Why is this?

You can see that

t= 1115.0*b = 248645.0

And if

17.8*(p/a) = 3969.4

Then

17.8*(t/p) = 223.0 (our factor, b)

a*(t/p)
1115.0

p/1115
17.8

also a*(t/p) = 1115.0

I could be once again misunderstanding but
what it looks like is that theres some real number that always transforms p into an integer on the ring of integers (Z) representing multiples of the factors of p.

Now notice

b/17.8 = 12.52808988764045

We can also get that number like so..

t/p = 12.52808988764045
I think (though I could be mistaken) is that the reason is because t is b*1115 and 12.52808988764045 is the ratio between b and 17.8 as well as the ratio between
p and 1115.

And if we do

t/√p = 1764.9495488858483

1764.9495488858483^2 = 3115046.9101123596

also incidentally
3115046.9101123596/t =12.52808988764045
3115046.9101123596/12.52808988764045 =
t (this is obvious but I want to point it out anyway), or 248645.0

and

1115/b = 5.0

248645.0/5 = 49729.0

and

√49729.0 = b

Why is this last part true, that √(t/5) = b?

Every ten years, a new social nexus, from Usenet to Reddit. Every day, a flame war. Every year, a great leader that wins flame wars, convinces people to follow them. The question is, what happens next? What do you preach to the gullible masses you won over?

Every single time it gets to politics, and then, to philosophy. Yet, there are no large strides in sight to world peace.

You've seen that meme where everything is just applied math. Well, math is applied philosophy, and philosophy is a product of misunderstanding the language.

In the end, the flame war you won never mattered. Archived threads, Wayback Machine, inactive Usenet mirrors. Acres upon acres of human thought, passionately expressed in computer text, roamed by no one but web crawlers. Give them three days, and they'll forget what you taught them.

WWI had shown us that we couldn't improve the masses with art and education. There is no vaccine against stupidity.

Life on Earth is hell. People are hell. Living among people is hell. If your life isn't hell, you're fortunate enough to be paying criminals that are stronger than other criminals around them, for protection.

Only the habit of systematically denying yourself pleasures your inner animal wants, plus a healthy dose of doubt, can make you human. Without restraint, a man is merely a greedy beast.

stateofjs survey reminds me of all that's wrong with JavaScript: too many frameworks each of which has to reinvent the wheel and depend on too many node_modules child dependencies, most don't support TypeScript properly (ever tried to convert a node-express-mongoose tutorial to TS?), there is still no proper type support in JS core language, and browser features get added in form of overly complex APIs instead of handy DOM methods.

Instead the community gets excited about micro-improvements like optional chaining which has been possible in other languages for decades.

At least there is something like TypeScript, but I don't like its syntax either, it's overly verbose and adds too much "Java feeling" to JavaScript in my opinion.

Also there is too much JS in web development, as CSS and HTML seem to have missed adding enough native functionality that works reliable cross browser to build websites in a descriptive way without misunderstanding web dev for application engineering.

After all, I'd rather have frontend PHP than more JavaScript everywhere.

Anyway, at least the survey has the option to choose how satisfied or unsatisfied people are about certain aspects of JS. But I already suspect that most respondents will seem to be very happy and eager to learn the latest hype train frameworks or stick to their beloved React in the future.

!Rant

TL;DR - Getting married can lead to installing life malware.

MARRIAGE SOFTWARE....

A young husband wrote this to a Systems Analyst -
(Marriage Software Div);

Dear Systems Analyst,

I am desperate for some help! I recently upgraded my program from Girlfriend 7.0 to Wife 1.0 and found that the new program began unexpected Child Processing and also took up a lot of space and valuable resources. This wasn't mentioned in the product brochure.

In addition Wife 1.0 installs itself into all other programs and launches during systems initialization and then it monitors all other system activities.

Applications such as "Boys' Night out 2.5" and "Golf 5.3" no longer run, and crashes the system whenever selected.

Attempting to operate selected "Soccer 6.3" always fails and "Shopping 7.1" runs instead.

I cannot seem to keep Wife 1.0 in the background whilst attempting to run any of my favorite applications. Be it online or offline.
.
I am thinking of going back to "Girlfriend 7.0", but uninstall doesn't work on this program. Can you please help?

.... The Systems Analyst replied:

Dear Customer,
This is a very common problem resulting from a basic misunderstanding of the functions of the Wife 1.0 program.

Many customers upgrade from Girlfriend 7.0 to Wife 1.0 thinking that Wife 1.0 is merely a UTILITY AND ENTERTAINMENT PROGRAM.

Actually, Wife 1.0 is an OPERATING SYSTEM designed by its Creator to run everything on your current platform.
You are unlikely to be able to purge Wife 1.0 and still convert back to Girlfriend 7.0, as Wife 1.0 was not designed to do this and it is impossible to uninstall, delete or purge the program files from the System once it is installed.

Some people have tried to install Girlfriend 8.0 or Wife 2.0 but have ended up with even more problems. (See Manual under Alimony/Child Support and Solicitors' Fees).

Having Wife 1.0 installed, I recommend you keep it Installed and deal with the difficulties as best as you can.

When any faults or problems occur, whatever you think has caused them, you must run the.........
C:\ APOLOGIZE\ FORGIVE ME.EXE Program and avoid attempting to use the *Esc-Key for it will freeze the entire system.

It may be necessary to run C:\ APOLOGIZE\ FORGIVE ME.EXE a number of times, and eventually hope that the operating system will return to normal.

Wife 1.0, although a very high maintenance programme, can be very rewarding.

To get the most out of it, consider buying additional Software such as "Flowers 2.0" and "Chocolates 5.0" or "HUGS\ KISSES 6.0" or "TENDERNESS\ UNDERSTANDING 10.0" or "even Eating Out Without the Kids 7.2.1" (if Child processing has already started).

DO NOT under any circumstances install "Secretary 2.1" (Short Skirt Version) or "One Nightstand 3.2" (Any Mood Version), as this is not a supported Application for Wife 1.0 and the system will almost certainly CRASH.

BEST WISHES!

Yours,"
Systems Analyst.
-----------------------------------------------
I'm not sure if this is a repost - if it is I apologise, but it's too good not to share.

I’m applying to jobs cuz my dad keeps bugging me. But all these jobs require a “friendly” “enthusiastic” and “outgoing” type of person. Ive been told that I’m rude or something similar but it’s just a misunderstanding. I’m just awkward asf. How do I stop being so fucking AWKWARD and ANXIOUS????? I can’t STAND IT. I just sit there in SILENCE and people think I’m being a bitch.

Look, dude, I'm a busy man. Can you please not waste 15 minutes of my FUCKING time on your misunderstanding of code I FUCKING wrote? Code I wrote, apparently wrong, based on your SHITTY naming?

Christ alive, stop getting in my god damn way.

I tell a designer at the company to take a look at a (huge) corporate web project we're currently building. He's not assigned to the project, but I thought a fresh eye and recommendations could be good for future Sprints, since we're doing a first release in a month.

The guy knew all of this, yet his "designer a.k.a artistic spirit" couldn't hold him from sending a UI/UX review to the PM, of about 6-7 pages or smth - I dont even remember now.

The whole report had a total misunderstanding of the business logics, because he didn't even wait for me to explain that shit to him. Eventually his versions of UX suggestions were irrelevant. It was pretty funny, now that i think about it.
I'm guessing he just hoped to get some attention...?

tldr: its fucking disgusting when designers try to act as artists;

I think WW3 will be started by misunderstanding. China will invade Japan. And the scene I can imagine will be :

A random Japanese: "Konichiwa"
A random C official : "攻我菊花？🤬"

Secondly, Russia invade Malaysia and Indonesia , after we told president Putin "Kita Suka awak"

And then that's how ....

WORLD WAR 3 STARTED.