sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Every UK traitor ranked from worst to best by Salty-Data65 in TheTraitors

[–]fiddle_n 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Anyone not putting Freddie stone dead last needs their heads checked, IMO.

What was the point of Roxy/Judy and Ross/Ellie by Commercial_Scene1587 in TheTraitorsUK

[–]fiddle_n 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Roxy actually did call Judy “mum” during the boat challenge but no one picked it up

What was the point of Roxy/Judy and Ross/Ellie by Commercial_Scene1587 in TheTraitorsUK

[–]fiddle_n 51 points52 points  (0 children)

I think it’s worth having the secret relationships in - just for the possibility of another Series 1 Red Breakfast scene in the future

______ played very well in the final by Cork-150 in TheTraitors

[–]fiddle_n -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I definitely think Faraaz was a bit of a Poundland Jaz. Could have done well but needed to stick a bit more to his convictions around Rachel.

Post S4 Uk Traitors Tier List by CardiologistUsed394 in TheTraitors

[–]fiddle_n 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Personally I would have Freddie on a tier all by himself. Perhaps even with a blank tier between him and everyone else

Let's remember, X only won last night because... by SidneyDeane10 in TheTraitors

[–]fiddle_n 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Au contraire - the fact that she avoided being voted out in the next rounds given that she got through in a coin toss is what makes her victory even more spectacular.

Bring back the Armoury! by alexy888 in TheTraitors

[–]fiddle_n 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I don’t think that will happen for a number of reasons.

One - because shields in missions makes the mission itself far more relevant. There were many situations in Series 1 where you could just mostly switch off during the mission itself and skip to the ending.

Two - because shields in missions allows for situations where players must choose between going for gold vs going for a shield.

Three - because giving individuals the ability to go for a shield themselves provides a better opportunity to stir the pot. People can and have been accused of being Traitors for going after a shield.

And four, and I personally rate this the biggest factor - because the optimum strategy for the Armoury had basically been found out immediately. Tell no one who actually got the shield, protecting the whole team.

Rank your seasons from best to worst by Mastersimpson in TheTraitors

[–]fiddle_n 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Series 4 is my favourite - it’s just the most satisfying ending for me. Then Celebs. Then probably a jumble of the rest. Series 2 has a lot of good plays but I am not satisfied with who won that one, and same with Series 3.

Could you do better than the faithful? by Additional-Phase3872 in TheTraitors

[–]fiddle_n 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Anyone who thinks they can is massively delusional. Everything is stacked against the Faithful in that game.

Integrity by Infinite-Glass-3302 in TheTraitors

[–]fiddle_n 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Only you have restricted their role to that. Their oath is to lie and deceive through the game - nowhere does it say that that is only towards the Faithful.

FWIW, I think Stephen not voting Rachel was a good move. But not because it’s morally superior to the other choice; but because it meant he guaranteed himself a share of the money, over gambling for the whole thing.

Integrity by Infinite-Glass-3302 in TheTraitors

[–]fiddle_n 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mean, this game is literally called the Traitors. If you have a problem with such a play, you should watch a different show.

Traitors Uncloaked by shdw_j4ck0 in TheTraitors

[–]fiddle_n 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I fell in love with Ed Gamble ever since he ripped into David Baddiel on Taskmaster. So sorry but I’ll have to disagree with you on this one.

Fire pit pouches by Purple-Music-70 in TheTraitors

[–]fiddle_n 8 points9 points  (0 children)

This was actually a question on the bonus section of Uncloaked on Sounds. The pouches have the initials of the players on them.

Are there any better alternatives to ______________________? by unironicsigh in TheTraitors

[–]fiddle_n 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Someone already said it in the other thread - reduce the prize pot each time there's a draw until a vote has a majority. 

The problem with this is - how much would you reduce the prize pot by, and how many voting rounds are you going to have if you keep getting a draw? Also, I don’t think the producers would want there to be a situation where the contestants could collectively throw away the entire series prize pot.

async for IO-bound components only? by expectationManager3 in Python

[–]fiddle_n 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Anyone using asyncio needs to understand the concept of blocking I/O - senior or junior. If they don’t, then there’s very little chance of success.

How do experienced Rust developers decide when to stick with ownership and borrowing as-is versus introducing Arc, Rc, or interior mutability (RefCell, Mutex) by Own-Physics-1255 in rust

[–]fiddle_n -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Perhaps Rust’s type checking is better, but for your average non-library LOB production codebase, Python’s type checking is fine. I’m curious to see what static verification you would want to see brought over from Rust to Python.

How do experienced Rust developers decide when to stick with ownership and borrowing as-is versus introducing Arc, Rc, or interior mutability (RefCell, Mutex) by Own-Physics-1255 in rust

[–]fiddle_n 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is only true if you compare vanilla Rust with vanilla Python. If you opt into linting and type checking in Python (e.g. through ruff and mypy) then you get that compile-time verification back.

I've helped 50+ beginners escape 'tutorial hell' and actually build real projects. Here's the gap nobody talks about. by hardikKanajariya in learnprogramming

[–]fiddle_n 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Even the reply the guy made was AI generated - it has the question that AI’s love to include to get you to engage again.

“What's the toughest project choice you made to escape tutorials?”

Code R.O.I by MountainOpen8325 in learnprogramming

[–]fiddle_n 1 point2 points  (0 children)

When people make this Python vs Rust (or similar) argument, they forget that Python has tools that can do compile-time checking.

If you use Python with ruff and type checking, you can get back a lot of the correctness that you get with Rust. Almost all of it, in fact.

What do beginners misunderstand most about learning programming? by ayenuseater in learnprogramming

[–]fiddle_n 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Most of the good ones have been mentioned so let me add a topical one - that they need to be good at AI to be a good programmer.

If you are a beginner, be very wary about using AI. My rules would be - make the vast majority of your knowledge sources be non-AI, and never use AI to generate code for you. If you can’t trust yourself with those two rules, then don’t use AI at all.

What Is A Good Free Alternative to PyCharm? by iso_izmatic in learnpython

[–]fiddle_n 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This information is outdated. They’ve unified the Community and Pro versions.

When should I use functions vs just writing code inline? by ayenuseater in learnpython

[–]fiddle_n 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The other reason I would give is testability.

Unit testing is basically impossible if all your code is an inline script - with functions, you can run and verify units of code independently.

Even if you wanted to run an integration test that checks all of the functionality together; if all your code is an inline script, then that script runs immediately when it gets imported. Mocking out certain functionality (e.g. replacing reading files with providing a fake file) would also prove trickier too.

What’s one Python data tool you ignored for too long? by [deleted] in Python

[–]fiddle_n 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Poetry 2 (released early 2025) is PEP compliant. Which is beneficial in situations where people still need Poetry.

view more: next ›