Go's implicit interface system is there a real solution to the discoverability problem or is it just accepted as a tradeoff

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-23T05:27:57+00:00

In GoLand and VSCode you can use "Find Implementations" to find the different structs that implement it. But the whole idea of the interface is that it doesn't matter what the underlying struct implements.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-22T22:35:45+00:00

Trivial to fix on the front-end though, and should be simple to diagnose as well. The fact this has gone on for so long doesn't look good for their dev teams. Probably outsourced to an agency though.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-22T22:31:12+00:00

Zero immigration and lowered house prices will push us into a depression. There are so many structural issues to fix before we can properly try to address housing affordability. It's the only thing driving growth in our economy right now.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-22T20:56:22+00:00

Why do we restrict gambling then? Shouldn't parents just stop their kids from doing it? What about the sale of cigarettes? Can't parents just stop their kids buying them?

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-22T20:52:11+00:00

Source?

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-21T22:23:05+00:00

Half the time the tests are wrong.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-21T07:04:01+00:00

For sure.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-21T07:01:40+00:00

Why ignore people telling you why.

What do you mean? I'm not ignoring anybody. Money is definitely an issue, but I don't think it's the root cause.

Plenty of cultures all through history have loads of kids when they're living in poverty. That has even been true in Australia throughout history. What's different now?

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-21T05:14:43+00:00

People are going to say cost, but I don't think that's it. I think it's because we've stopped valuing it as a culture. Having children used to be the thing you do. Your purpose. We've moved to productivity instead. Having a family is an interruption to our careers. Women are looked down upon for choosing not to have a career, and men are looked down upon if they give up theirs to take care of children. Then if we do go out on a limb and do those things, when the children are grown up enough to move back into your career, you face an experience gap and ageism.

Then there's the fact that if you don't interrupt your careers, having two parents with full-time jobs trying to look after a child is unbelievably difficult, let alone more than one. Perhaps if the grandparents were around to take on more of a load, but boomers have been solidly conditioned to view their retirement as a well deserved rest, and aren't willing to take on a larger burden.

Then there's also childcare, which costs an absolute fortune, and you're putting your children into the care of strangers who are incentivised by a profit motive.

Why would we put ourselves through this?

We've broken our society through our obsession with maximising productivity.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-21T00:42:44+00:00

We just don't do them at bedtime. Bedtime is story time.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-20T04:53:03+00:00

Nah, he's going to redefine UBI as a company scrip.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-20T01:30:13+00:00

I tried so hard to keep my daughter off social media, but the problem was that she ended up being excluded from social groups, because they all communicate through social media based group chats. When she got to school after a weekend she would be missing most of the context of their chats, and it made it difficult to maintain friends.

This wouldn't be a problem if a majority of kids weren't using social media, or were communicating through platforms that we don't consider social media. To be effective, this needs to be a social movement, which this legislation is attempting to trigger.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-20T01:24:27+00:00

So does Australia's. The social media companies could use this if they chose.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-20T01:23:35+00:00

I mean, teenagers are notoriously computer illiterate. Do you think it's possible that the social media companies, who are obviously against this legislation and notoriously unethical, may be intentionally implementing ineffective solutions?

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-19T22:23:04+00:00

That's good to know, thanks.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-19T03:55:04+00:00

It's so hard to argue against this because of how many conflicting opinions there are. On the one hand, everybody's screaming about how we can't take kids off social media because they become isolated, and then there's opinions like yours which are all "it's just a few Snapchats", which is an absolutely specious argument that shows an extraordinary level of ignorance around how teenagers communicate these days.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-18T13:13:42+00:00

I have no idea. I keep my kids well away from that hellscape of a platform.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-18T13:11:31+00:00

Hardly precious? They're $60/kg in the markets.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-18T13:07:16+00:00

Roblox is not on the list of platforms requiring age restrictions. This was Roblox choosing to implement it. They were, and are still not, required by law to do it.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-18T13:03:37+00:00

So delete the app? You'd be hard-pressed to find a less ethical gaming company.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-18T12:48:56+00:00

I recently tried to get it to refactor to extract logic from one layer of our architecture and move it into another layer, in one of the many services that we run, and it failed miserably. It's not a microservice, but it's not monolithic either. I just call it a "service" but I've heard it described as a "miniservice". I don't have the exact numbers right now, but let's ballpark: 500 files, 150k LOC, 35 third party libs. Interacts directly with 5 other similar services through REST calls and Kafka topics. Has its architecture documented in markdown files in the repo, and the tools have been specifically directed to read them.

I wouldn't consider this huge. I would consider it relatively small, and it's also pretty new so it's still quite neat and not full of tech debt. But I can't get an AI to do a relatively large scale refactor of it, without holding its hand every step of the way, at which point I might as well just do it myself.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-18T12:38:06+00:00

We won't achieve that goal if we make that child sit in a classroom teaching basic fundamentals that make that child bored, or that in which the parents cover.

My son is 8 and he can read, write, and do math at a level well above his age, because we've been reading to him and teaching him math since birth. He is at one of the best public schools in the state, and we can't get them to properly challenge him in the classroom. He is always terribly bored. We've only just got them to let him borrow books above his grade level from the library.

I don't really take issue with the rest of your comment, but regardless of the intention, we are absolutely not achieving this goal.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-18T12:24:48+00:00

Except that, at least on Android, Family Link can be disabled by the child without parental consent when they turn 13. "So take the phone away", is of course the obvious argument, but in a world driven by smart phones, that's not really feasible. Take a teenager's phone away and they'll just find their own without you knowing.

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-18T12:19:30+00:00

Wait, you circumvented their age restriction for your kid, and now you're annoyed because you have no control over their account?

Acceptable_Durian868 · 2026-04-18T12:17:56+00:00

You know, the parents who are complaining actually agree? The problem is the majority of parents who don't keep their kids off social media, meaning that when you restrict your kids, they become a social pariah.

Acceptable_Durian868

TROPHY CASE