What is Hackers' Pub?

Hackers' Pub is a place for software engineers to share their knowledge and experience with each other. It's also an ActivityPub-enabled social network, so you can follow your favorite hackers in the fediverse and get their latest posts in your feed.

0
2
0
0
0

Welcome to MastodonBD!

While our primary focus is Bangladesh - its people, culture, technology, and public discourse - the instance is open to everyone, regardless of location. We encourage respectful dialogue, diverse perspectives, and meaningful connections across borders.

If you believe in open social networks and constructive conversation, you are welcome here.

Let’s build this space thoughtfully, together.

0
2
0
1

With the escalation of the war with Iran, many donations to Gaza have stopped as global attention shifts elsewhere. 💔🇵🇸

But the suffering has not stopped. Hunger has not stopped. Illness does not wait.

Families in Gaza are still in urgent need of food, medicine, and basic necessities. Even as the world focuses on other conflicts, Gaza still needs your support.

Please don’t forget Gaza. Every share and every small donation can make a real difference in saving a family. 🤲
chuffed.org/project/157281

0
2
0
4
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
1

イ・米によるイラン急襲で死者が出ている施設の中に「女子小学校」が… 👿 (見出しに書け)

(そもそも国際法違反の攻撃であり、非軍事施設それも学校を爆撃するなど言語道断なのは勿論のこと、為念)

小学校に攻撃…児童57人が死亡 イラン国営通信(2026年2月28日掲載)|日テレNEWS NNN

news.ntv.co.jp/category/intern

>> イラン国営通信によりますと28日、イラン南部ミナーブにある女子小学校がアメリカとイスラエルの攻撃を受け、少なくとも57人の児童が死亡、60人がケガをしたということです。また53人の児童が、ガレキの下に取り残されていて、救助活動が続いていると…

0
0

小学館の労組が、出版労連を脱退していたことを、版元ドットコムの版元日誌で知って驚いた。

版元とフリーランスと組合員のはざまで
hanmoto.com/nisshi1231

関連記事を探してたらこういうのが出てきて、最近の小学館絡みの話とももしかすると、何となく繋がっているのかもしれない、と感じたり。

小学館労働組合が出版労連脱退を決め、出版始め他のメディア系労組に波紋と衝撃が…
news.yahoo.co.jp/expert/articl

0
1

What if I could convince you that taking the same time to explain detailed requirements and carefully validate results with a junior colleague instead of a chatbot would not only give you two people who understood the code instead of zero, but if you do it a few times in a row you eventually get a senior colleague out of the deal for free.

0
24
2
1
0
1
0

What if I could convince you that taking the same time to explain detailed requirements and carefully validate results with a junior colleague instead of a chatbot would not only give you two people who understood the code instead of zero, but if you do it a few times in a row you eventually get a senior colleague out of the deal for free.

0
24
2
0
0

Settle a debate for me: the word “Doug” (short for Douglas) is closest to:

0
0
19
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0

それとは別に、見知らぬアカウントの発言をリポストする行為、下手にやると誹謗中傷の片棒を担がされるって個人的には思ってるんだけど、なんでみんなそんなにホイホイと出来るのかねと疑問に思ってる

と言うのもポスト単体だと普通の内容だけど、連投として見ると誹謗中傷や増悪扇動の類いだった、って言う場合に備え、それなりに警戒した方がいいんでは……と個人的には考えてます

1
0

RE: cosocial.ca/@mhoye/11614877281

To expand this point: software is composed of code, organizational processes, and people. A surprisingly large number of software developers are narrowly focused on generating code and miss all the surrounding processes and people (skills, knowledge, understanding of goals) that make that code usable.

"It's so good at generating code" doesn't address the costs in other categories:

- Degradation of processes. For example, you get denial of service on code reviews means code reviews go away, "it passes tests, it's fine!"

- Degradation of people's skills and knowledge. If it breaks, no one will know how it works because no one really understands the code. And an experienced engineer can only control an agent because they have experience _writing code_. If you stop writing code, that experience degrades, new people don't get it, and control of the agent degrades.

For this narrow focus on artifacts, and not the surrounding requirements, I highly recommend the book "What Machines Can't Do: Politics and Technology in the Industrial Enterprise", by Robert J. Thomas. (It has nothing to do with AI, it's about manufacturing.) But you see the failure modes from what he describes as having only "an aesthetic of product", and no "aesthetic of process"; similar failure modes result in the original DevOps movement, which was a political movement, not a job title.

0
2
0

RE: mastodon.nz/@leighelse/1161497

I worked on a large scale project testing medical transcription. (Maybe one of the largest ones) Hundreds of doctors reviewed the output and called out the issues.

It was not, and still is not, ready. Public health teams that roll this out without red teaming and remediation and feedback and a way to influence the weights of models are irresponsible.

In fact, I am willing to offer up to five hours of my time — free — to any public sector team or nonprofit (with annual operating costs below USD 2M) anywhere in the world that needs help figuring out what makes sense and how to respond to top down pressure telling you to implement AI.

And if they’ve already chosen something for you, I am willing to help you figure out how to sand down the risks.

email me: adrianna (at) futureethics.ai

Edit: for public servants who technically can’t get ‘free’ things from a vendor, consider this one on one coaching / advice or a pre-sales call

0
3
0
1
0

RE: cosocial.ca/@mhoye/11614877281

To expand this point: software is composed of code, organizational processes, and people. A surprisingly large number of software developers are narrowly focused on generating code and miss all the surrounding processes and people (skills, knowledge, understanding of goals) that make that code usable.

"It's so good at generating code" doesn't address the costs in other categories:

- Degradation of processes. For example, you get denial of service on code reviews means code reviews go away, "it passes tests, it's fine!"

- Degradation of people's skills and knowledge. If it breaks, no one will know how it works because no one really understands the code. And an experienced engineer can only control an agent because they have experience _writing code_. If you stop writing code, that experience degrades, new people don't get it, and control of the agent degrades.

For this narrow focus on artifacts, and not the surrounding requirements, I highly recommend the book "What Machines Can't Do: Politics and Technology in the Industrial Enterprise", by Robert J. Thomas. (It has nothing to do with AI, it's about manufacturing.) But you see the failure modes from what he describes as having only "an aesthetic of product", and no "aesthetic of process"; similar failure modes result in the original DevOps movement, which was a political movement, not a job title.

0
2
0
0