365 private links
J’ai appris une chose importante : l’arbitrage n’est pas une discipline scientifique.
En dehors du sport et du football avec des caméras et aide à la décision, un pilote de chasse.
En 2024, un pilote s’est éjecté de son F-35, car, malgré plusieurs reboot, son casque connecté indiquait des erreurs critiques. Problème : après l’éjection du pilote, l’avion a continué à voler correctement pendant de très longues minutes. Il semblerait que son casque avait un simple bug informatique. [...] La subtilité réside par la suite avec la carrière du pilote, poursuivi pour abandon d'avion fonctionnel [...] Nous n’avons plus des pilotes qui « sentent » leur avion, mais des opérateurs suivants des procédures informatisées.
Non seulement la complexité crée artificiellement des problèmes, mais elle empêche les humains d’acquérir de l’expérience et de prendre des décisions.
La seule stratégie possible pour un humain raisonnable est donc de ne plus prendre de décisions (ce qui est déjà une décision en soi).
Looking for examples of web magazines made with html/css [so the 3. option].
The spectrum:
- a website with branching levels of navigation, average content-heavy website
- a website with single level of linear paginated navigation, back and forth, text-heavy html/epub
- a responsive paginated website that mimics printed magazines in the best way possible, and looks interesting on all screens
- embedded static PDF viewer with page turn and zoom
- static PDF
C'est délirant puisque l'IA n'est pas encore capable de remplacer les jobs.
The most radical act in tech isn’t building something new. It’s keeping the old ideals alive: that people should control their tools, not the other way around.
The lack of tone, diversity of cultures, and the fact that many people using social media in English aren't native speakers make it all harder to detect irony and serious-sounding jokes online.
Please be careful and make sure your jokes don't end up feeding the disinformation machine, even if you feel it's obvious to you. In doubt, at least use the popular markers "/s" (sarcastic) or "/j" (joke) or parentheses at the end to make this clearer.
Make implicit explicit, especially in this age of disinformation and AI slop.
When we look around in our field, everyone in Tech seems to focus on one thing: "How can we adopt AI in our tooling and in our processes?"
So it is a proof of a bubble. Everyone is enthusiasts but it doesn't solve real use cases.
A rightful question can be: "How can we set up our engineers for long-term career success?"
Jens Meiert ask pertinent questions to solve this big up question.
What can be done reasonably well with AI today? (And tomorrow? And the day after tomorrow?)
How are our engineers affected by AI?
- Are our engineers using AI?
- How are our engineers using AI?
- What are realistic expectations for our engineers in terms of AI use and proficiency?
- Are we setting clear expectations for use of and proficiency with AI in our job descriptions as well?
- Do we document and anchor these expectations in our competency and skill matrixes?
- Are we watching the AI market, and are we evaluating tooling?
- While the AI market is in flux—which it may be for some time—, do we have enough flexibility (budget, processes, room for errors) to test AI tooling?
- If our engineers leave the company, would they find a new job—or would their profile make them less interesting?
- If they would not necessarily find a new job, what extra skills and experience do they need?
- How can we make our engineers ready for the AI age?
As you can tell, we cannot have all those answers yet—this is precisely why this is so important to get on top of, and it’s also the reason why I say “start answering.”
Now, everyone’s a prize exhibit in the FAANG zoo, because mastering this tangled mess is what opens their gates. Being just a CRUD monkey doesn’t feel fun anymore. If this is what “progress” looks like, I don’t want any part of it.
The technologies to build for 10 years ago dramatically improved!
As mentionned by LeHollandaisVolant, one thing the article doesn't mention is that:
- 1 the pages are more interactive
- 2 the data changes in real time
If, given the prompt, AI does the job perfectly on first or second iteration — fine. Otherwise, stop refining the prompt. Go write some code, then get back to the AI. You'll get much better results.
Ohhh modern tech-stack, ohh shiny object :D
Make websites because you like to.
I totally agree: using HTML as much as possible, then CSS, then JS to enhance it in this order.
The API can respond with HTML fragments anyway for an HTML table.
They wouldn't use Google Search engine as default for 20 billions per year.
Their marketing values privacy, but this partnership is a on their commitment to privacy.
Take: If Apple really cared about privacy, not only should they choose a different search engine, they should block ads and trackers in Safari by default.
But they don't even if they can do it tomorrow.
As a nuclear engineer, I have never been asked to show my portfolio of reactor designs I maintain in my free time, I have never been asked to derive the six-factor formula, the quantization of angular momentum, Brehmsstrahlung, or to whiteboard gas centrifuge isotopic separation, water hammer, hydrogen detonation, or cross-section resonance integrals.
There's something deeply wrong with an industry that presumes you're a fraud unless repeatedly and performatively demonstrated otherwise and treats the hiring process as a demented form of 80s-era fraternity hazing.
Thoughts of https://blog.koalie.net/2025/08/30/tech-mistrust-or-fatigue/
Yes.
I am ready for the revival of directories of websites curated by people for people, and found through serendipity. How much worse will it get? I am both curious and very afraid. But also angry. And powerless.
So I’m frustrated.
Aussi sur la taille des entreprises incompatibles avec l'éthique.