Not having any personal projects is perfectly fine. Don't worry about it. Not everyone has to have their job as their hobby. Try other things (music, hiking, cooking, etc.). Try to find a hobby that makes you happy (if you don't already have one). That's way more important than having a public GitHub profile. And if a company decided not to hire you because of that, you basically dodged a bullet.

Here is the link to the original website (an NGO that monitors blocked websites in Turkey): https://ifade.org.tr/engelliweb/distrowatch-erisime-engelledi/

And here is the Google translation of the text on that page:

The IP address of the DistroWatch platform, which provides news, reviews, rankings and general information about Linux distributions, was blocked by the National Cyber ​​Incident Response Center (USOM) on the grounds of "IP hosting/spreading malware".

Good point. However, approaching this problem from "YAGNI" point of view is a bit misleading, I think. If you are not going to need the timestamp, you shouldn't add it to your code base.

In my opinion, hastiness is the culprit. When a property appears to be a binary one, we jump to the conclusion to use a boolean way too quickly. We should instead stop and ask ourselves if we are really dealing with a situation that can be reduced to a single bit. The point raised by the article is a good example: you may want to record the state change as timestamp. Moreover, in a lot of the cases, the answer is not even binary. The values for is_published may be, "Yes", "No" or "I don't know" (and then we will be too quick to assign null to "I don't know"). Underlying problem is that we don't spend enough time when modeling our problems. And this is a sure way of accumulating technical debt.

git branches are just homeomorphic endofunctors mapping submanifolds of a Hilbert space

Yeah, once you realize that everything falls into place.

OK, I may have hit a wall with this one.

I wouldn't expect it to impact Fedora, but this will probably be significant for Rocky/Alma.

I think I will quit at this point.

This can only be solved at organization level. First, I don't think there is a reliable way to measure business impact of an engineer's work. But I don't think that's necessary anyway. The organization should focus on the team, not the individual. Only real measurement you get is the customer feedback. And the best way to make it matter is to shorten the feedback loop. If in your organization some people write stories and then send them to engineers, your engineers are essentially not in the loop. Engineers need to be present (and asking critical questions) when you are defining the features. Only then can you expect the team to deliver what the customer wants. And that generally requires organizational changes (cutting the middle man, giving the team more autonomy in their work and developing a trust culture).

https://observablehq.com/@ayhanfuat/the-fall-of-stack-overflow

https://www.overheid.nl/english

Overheid.nl is the central access point to all information about government organisations of the Netherlands.

When I saw the title, I thought "just another blog on 10x developer". I don't really know why I decided to read on, but I'm happy I did. Searls touches on many more while investigating the topic. The writer approaches the topic from a inter-generational point of view and also goes in to things like "passion" and "craftsmanship". I would even say, this is not about the 10x developer at all. This is about how as a young engineering discipline we are still trying to find better ways of doing things.

It’s an open secret that the industry has no idea how to teach people to program. Computer Science degrees famously don’t prepare programmers for the job of programming, which has always been left as an exercise to the student to figure out on their own time. If the industry is going to outlive us enthusiast programmers, will it adopt a sustainable approach to educating the next generation that doesn’t require people to teach themselves everything?

I no longer look forward to updates.
[...]
It seems to me that some software is actually getting worse, and that this is a more recent trend.
[...]
Why does this happen? I don't know, but my own bias suggests that it's because there's less focus on regression testing. Many of the problems I see look like regression bugs to me. A good engineering team could have caught them with automated regression tests, but these days, it seems as though many teams rely on releasing often and then letting users do the testing.

The problem with that approach, however, is that if you don't have good automated tests, fixing one regression may resurrect another.

Every time I see a new update, I think: "I wonder what will break after this update" and postpone them as much as I can. Software updates shouldn't cause anxiety. But they do these days...

I don't follow it very closely, but as far as I know, they are the only one implementing the open protocol they designed (which doesn't interoperate with ActivityPub). However, there seems to be some efforts for creating a bridge: https://www.docs.bsky.app/blog/feature-bridgyfed

As you said, there are some recognizable faces and that may impact the adoption. But not being compatible with ActivityPub is a real bummer.

Who is this particular developer

As far as I understand from the discussions about the topic, Maxim Dounin was one of the few core developers of nginx. Looks like Wikipedia has already been updated.

I believe you can replace start with the command that is suitable for your system (e.g., xdg-open for linux).

I think you have a better chance if your instance focuses on a topic instead of being general purpose. That's the reason I chose programming.dev. All communities there are related to programming so when I sort by "local" I see something interesting even though I haven't subscribed to that community. And that increases my interaction with those communities.

It's correct that rebase rewrites history, but it's important to identify when it's not acceptable. If you are working on a branch that is shared by others (typically main), you should never use rebase. But it's an acceptable practice when used properly. I use rebase on my feature branches whenever necessary. If it fell behind the main branch I do git fetch followed by git rebase origin/main, resolve the merge conflicts and keep coding. I also use interactive rebase when I need to tidy things up before merging the feature branch to main.

In my experience, interview culture differs depending on the country. So, it would be better to provide some context around that.

I wouldn't spend more than 2-3 hours on a take home challenge. I would politely decline such a requirement and move on to contact other employers even if the potential employer offers paying my 30h+ hour work week preparing for the interview. In my opinion, a "take home" should be a conversation starter so that you can ask questions and try to understand the candidate's thinking. But, as I said, it may differ according to industry/country, etc.

Here is my understanding:

Recently, a security vulnerability of Lemmy has been exploited by some malicious actors. This lead to some instances going down. The vulnerability has been fixed with version 0.18.2-rc.1 of lemmy-ui. But due to the way Lemmy issues and uses access tokens, the sessions has been invalidated in the database. So, the admins are recommending the users to log out and log back in if they haven't done so after the upgrade to version 0.18.2-rc.1 of lemmy-ui.

But I may be wrong. Perhaps others can provide a more accurate description.