For all the people talking about 5 hour PR review delays... This reminds me of some teams that rotate the "fire extinguisher/emergency bug fixer" duty every day/week/sprint to a different developer. One could rotate a dedicated "first review duty" person. That developer would be in charge of focusing on rapidly starting PR reviews as their priority, with option to request other reviewers if necessary. Spreading the duty around would make people be respectful of the reviewer because if they send unreviewed slop to the reviewers, it's likely that people will send them slop too.

> alongside, we can poison the nextjs cache for everyone for any site,

What??

Oh so that's why my bank app said it thought my old device was rooted when it wasn't...

It's not impossible that the Pentagon could have thought "alright, we want these readings. is there a civilian use for this kind of data and decided to see if a civilian project could be sprung up... Though that's more of a Cold War conceit. These days they would just do it themselves, it's probably an easy and cheap project.

Just as there are commercial earth imagery satellites, I would expect there are commercial RF source detection satellites. There are obvious sales channels to hedge funds, countries, militaries, and commercial transmission operators (searching for causes of interference).

Hedge funds is the fun one: detecting economic activity and growth (independent of official government figures).

On the origins of the term "monkey patching"

Thanks for sharing. I hadn't expected there to be any particularly interesting etymology at all, but there is. (I also hadn't considered that anyone might find the term offensive, but it did motivate the Q&A, so.)

Imagine the chaos if English had a phonetic spelling reformation like Spanish had a while ago...

Blame HN users for upvoting the story, not this chrome page...

So, WWE more than war-like fighting

I think MMA would be a more apt comparison; the fighting itself was very real, if still entertainment.

With how expensive payouts to the stable of a dead gladiator could be[0], it seems very likely to me that a lot of the matches were at least coordinated, if not outright planned.

[0] "But if he were injured or killed, the lease would convert to a sale and the gladiator's full cost would have to be paid, a sum that might be some 50 times higher than the lease price." https://www.jstor.org/stable/30038038

I sort of agree in the sense that most fights you could probably guess who wins, but I don't think that's the same as a cooperative performance.

Okay but the solution here is to identify and parcel your cases into discrete entities. The article doesn't say "don't accept anything odd", it says "clearly identify what you accept". If you have to accept odd cases, identify them so it's clear what's happening.

So this isn't about purity, it's about being declarative. i.e. make your code say what it accepts, instead of writing board/implicit acceptable inputs that inevitably forget cases and crashes.

If you limit what you accept as inputs then you can stop worrying about downstream error handling and debugging.

It's probably worse in warm climates, but macbook cables were disintegrating everywhere for the longest time.