With rails you'd always have to pay for absence of strict types with extensive testing where you'd basically have to verify that data structures match.
Type system support, and the tooling around that support, has gotten SO much more powerful in the last decade or so.
Lots of the warts also got burned off with better support for smart typing, auto vars, duck typing for inputs, etc.
That tooling covers a HUGE swath of bugs that I just don't have to worry nearly as much about, and it makes quick refactoring less painful and less risky.
Going back to Rails feels like stepping back into the dark ages. So many stupid repeated tests/specs for things that should just be in a type system. The tests are slower to write, cover less ground, and are much more brittle.
My tooling isn't as capable, my feedback loop is slower (hard to beat instant type hinting for errors/mismatches right in my editor as I type), and I feel like I'm working with a blindfold on.
---
Yes, parts of Rails are great, yes - if you know it already it's a very productive environment. But man do I absolutely hate the lack of interest in type systems from the majority of Rails devs.
It's hard to overstate how valuable it is to be able to change a data structure and have all 29 places you might have broken immediately presented to you with basically no effort on your end outside of some minor type work.
I will pick it every time over having to write 29 specs in rails to get even close to the same safety.
Ruby guys have made an attempt to introduce type system few years ago, but they found it nearly impossible to infer types from metaprogrammed code - which makes sense. So they came with the suggestion that you write types for dynamically generated methods yourself. Comeon!
Before you get to that screenshot, you have to get past the big, bold sentence that says "A human-friendly alternative to netstat for socket and port monitoring on Linux.".
Nobody is questioning what themes are available on gnome. Including a screenshot of the software running in a window that very much looks like macOS X is simply misleading.
If a Rust crate uses anything from the OS, and doesn't mention that OS, I wouldn't expect it to work on that OS, regardless if it's Windows, Linux or macOS. Just like graphical crates state what APIs they support, and if Metal is not mentioned for example, it is most likely not supported.
AI is great for hit'n'go, but in the long run it brought us more trouble than help. It gets very inconsistent, does not track the context (especially if it is a common-sense context), brings in some weird architectural patterns by default, avoids updating current components preferring to write new almost exactly the same ones alongside with similar existing ones, e.t.c, e.t.c.
It's definitely a great tool to quickly bootstrap something, but I find myself thinking "I should have better done that myself" more and more.
Russia has 50 nuclear submarines, of which 14 are ballistic missile carriers. Every couple of years they produce a new one, think its clear where the bets are on
I doubt it. The USSR / Russia concept of operations for nuclear missile submarines is way different from NATO countries. They don't typically conduct wide-ranging strategic deterrence patrols out in the open ocean. Instead they tend to stay in or near their own territorial waters, protected by surface warships and land-based aircraft. While US attack submarines have occasionally violated Russian territorial waters for special missions they don't do so on a regular basis because it's so dangerous.
Subs are very hard to track or to locate, which is why Washington has been deploying two thirds of their strategic warheads (the ones that are ready to use as opposed to being in cold storage or in disassembled state) on subs and why Russia, China, Britain, France and India all decided incur the substantial expense of deploying nukes on subs, too.
And not a single strategist on either side actually believes that to nullify the threat. A single boomer launching might not be outright MAD, but it would be too many warheads to defend against, and several major cities would be hit.
Ukraine has no large supersonic bombers the size of the TU-95/TU-160/TU-223m. They do have a very small fleet of SU-24, but those are tactical bombers, not strategic bombers.
I would assume this event was a one-time hack, it does not scale. Actually most of the “miracle weapons” from the very beginning of the conflict have faded away.
Bairktars? Gone. Sea drones? Haven't heard of them in a while. What else?
Russians in comparison are great at scaling. Rockets flying daily, vespa-drones - daily, FAB bombs got wings and flying daily. That's the consistency what wins wars, not the greatest talent.
You haven't heard as much about sea drones because Russia was forced to stop naval operations close to Ukraine by them, after losing 1/3 of the Black Sea Fleet.
This incident only shows the mistake of SU-30 crew which detected the sea drones from the long distance and for some reason got into the shooting range. Usually those drones are destroyed with something like X-38MT missiles, from the 50-70km range.
Otherwise you would have seen a lot more interceptors taken down
Starting July 1st all SIM cards in Russia need to have the owner register his biometry and passport details, otherwise the number is blocked.
Ukrainians had a window to perform this operation but I doubt they'll have the same approach possible in future.
I think that as far as a security measure this is really up there with the form the US makes you fill out when you visit the country that asks you to tick the box if you are a terrorist.
There are countless ways around this beginning with just asking someone to buy a sim card on your behalf.
No hack needed. You just give some change to poor people and register the cards in their name. This just raises the price a bit but does not prevent anything.
Quite easy to track though, like double sign-ins from different devices, uncommon locations, location and speed matching - like phone going 25mph in the forest.
And you don't need to permablock it, few minutes would be enough.
Oh it’s already implemented since 2000, with SORM system. Think they are to extend it to give direct FSB access without pre-request starting from 1st of september
An LLM explains that "SORM (System for Operative-Investigative Activities) is a Russian system of lawful interception used in telecommunications. SORM is mandated by Russian law, requiring all telecommunications providers to install interception equipment".
I don't buy it anymore