The authors think the url does not really matter anymore because

• they are not fully displayed in some browsers
• they need to be short and memorable to get people to it

So it does not need to contain a lot of information.

Inquiet de la perte de connaissance du métier de DBA. C'est une inquiétude qui me semble justifié.

Because no browsers satisfy the author. The interesting part is why.

Google will no longer back up the Internet: Cached webpages won't exist anymore. See https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/02/google-search-kills-off-cached-webpages/.

The author put thoughts into caching webpages. Each link should have metadata associated to it: a favicon or an image, a description and the main language of the page.
They are already many projects for it.

Everything can be self-hosted. The author merged his professional side with its personal.

The main point is why do we share so much stuff to websites no longer interested in the social web it was founded on.

A complex challenge as the official standards are implemented in few websites.
Guesses have to be made.

Software correctness is indeed praised by many, but in many cases it’s not entirely clear what it even means for software to be correct. In reality, it often boils down to some hand-wavy principle of least surprise, where a staggering amount of software requirements are entirely made up on the fly in response to the behavior of the code.

Bureaucracy tends to make generic rules valid for 95% of the people. But what happens to the 5% in each case? The job becomes automated, and these cases are not handled.
The author proposes to reduce the size of the communities, so they can fit to each individual.

Let’s start with something controversial: Capitalism is not an economic system. It is a philosophical and ideological force that shapes our lives, environment, and perception of humanity.

It’s a behemoth that thrives on relentless growth, often at a devastating cost. Under its reign, we witness the widening chasm of inequality, where the affluent soar on the wings of wealth while the less fortunate are left to the whims of an unforgiving market.

Our planet, the cradle of life itself, is treated as a commodity, its resources extracted with reckless abandon, its delicate ecosystems pushed to the brink for profit.
– Joan Westenberg, How to quit capitalism

There are 4 current design systems for Germany. Why not build one and use it everywhere instead? That's the question of the author and how they envision it for long-term 2029

Un retour sur un dev

There have already been many words written about the walled gardens of tech companies.

The reality is, for me at least, the premium I pay for the products I buy from Apple is a worthy exchange for the service I get. [...] The purchasing service and the after-sales support is unmatched.

In this way, the author is stuck because there are no other companies that offers this service.

Dans un futur post-consommation où les ressources matérielles deviennent primordiales.

Je dirais malgré tout que qui prend cette décision est le plus important. C’est assez structurant pour répondre ensuite au comment.

Plusieurs auteurs ou mouvements de pensée on décrit cette idée que la meilleure des choses était de faire décider des choses à l’endroit où ces choses ont lieu, par les gens qu’elles impactent.

1. Si vous prenez des décisions qui ne vous impactent pas, vous prenez de mauvaises décisions. Si on ne risque pas quelque chose dans la décision, la réflexion est faussée. C’est ceux qui subissent le risque qui savent.
2. Les décisions se prennent dans le lieu où le besoin apparaît. C’est au milieu du sujet, plongé dans le contexte, que l’on sait avec le plus de pertinence la bonne réponse à apporter. C’est ceux qui font qui savent en quelque sorte.

La réflexion pousse à diviser les personnes en quatre groupes.

Pour conclure : les meilleures personnes pour prendre les décisions sont celles qui prennent les risques des retombées de la décision. Il ne faut pas confondre décider et encadrer, ni décider ou contraindre (mettre une contrainte). Le mieux serait de projeter le rôle des “chef(fe)s” dans des rôles d’encadrement ou de limitation (et attention trop de contraintes étouffent), et le rôle des autres est de décider et de faire. Les “chef(fe)s” décident quand cela les concerne : généralement la stratégie, les décisions régaliennes, etc.

Que fait-on dans un numérique contraint, car c'est ce qu'il deviendra.