Mo pfp

Mo

@meb

384 Following
653 Followers
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
Nice.. thanks for sharing
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
I’ve used it a lot as a consumer, and I’ve arrived at the conclusion that graphql is great when you want to open access to a bunch of data and enable joins, without worrying about permissions For mutations im still in favour of very deterministic and specialised endpoints
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
Counterpoint, JSON fields can sometimes be handy for some data That said, definitely a +1 on strongly typed schemas
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
It has definitely enabled a huge range of projects, instead of having to reinvent the wheel
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
I heard GitHub act is good to set up in VSCode for replicating, but never went through with setup
1 reply
0 recast
3 reactions
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
And that’s where you rediscover that having an actual engineer on the team for a commercial project is still highly relevant
0 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
Independant of technology, writing tests is a cultural thing first and foremost. It's about a philosophy of continually providing your code works and does what you intended it to do. AI just helps us achieve better coverage. That said, 100% coverage is often useless, and one should always wonder what they are testing, not just spit out hundreds of lines of irrelevant boilerplate My experience on topic: Can make ChatGPT zero shot generate 800 LoC of working, meaningful test suits for a solidity contract
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
Sounds like an opportunity for another client
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
Yes, can't imagine building serious business logic on back-end that'll do important stuff yet live without a single unit test
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
Better version of this, an algo that monitors the blockchain and trades according to specific rules Instant cash out of owners of fund Ability for a fund manager role to perform individual trades
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
Step 2: Analyzing Frequency ( S(f) ) • Formula Part: S(f) is the frequency representation of their shit-talking. • Chad: Dominates low frequencies because he shit-talks consistently (every 30 seconds). Like elevator music—constant but harmless. • Karen: A massive low-frequency spike (every 5 minutes), representing her rare but devastating shit-talking. Imagine a foghorn—it’s quiet until it’s NOT. Step 3: Conclusion • Chad’s shit-talking is background noise, always present but not disruptive. • Karen’s shit-talking is a periodic explosion—you can predict it with S(f) , but when it comes, it’s an event. In short, Chad is the consistent sine wave of sarcasm, and Karen is the destructive delta function of fury.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
Thank you July, I asked ChatGPT to analyse this for me, so I and other signals processing left curves can understand. -- Why the Joke is Funny The humor comes from using the rigorous mathematical language of Fourier Transforms to analyze something as absurdly human and chaotic as shit-talking behavior. It’s the juxtaposition of scientific precision and petty human antics. Example Story: Chad vs. Karen Step 1: Observing Shit-Talking Over Time ( S(t) ) • Formula Part: S(t) is the time-domain signal for their shit-talking intensity. • Chad: A steady flow of low-intensity shit-talking, like, “Nice shirt, did your grandma pick it out?” every 30 seconds. • S_{\text{Chad}}(t) = 1 + \sin(2\pi \cdot \frac{1}{30} \cdot t) : Smooth, predictable signal. • Karen: Silent for minutes, then suddenly: “You’re the reason group projects fail!” every 5 minutes. • S_{\text{Karen}}(t) = 5 \cdot \delta(t - 5n) : Spikes of chaos.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
The world needs a @july post on the intricacies of the architecture of shit talking
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
Sounds like me, what's up?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
Learning through buidling is the way
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
You have to know and respect the existing rules so you can selectively break them in good intelligence
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
“No moat”* *Disclaimer: (pending having multiple billions to setup similar infrastructure)
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
This is it. The universe is built that you can get paid 10x more to know when to tell someone not to build a specific software instead of just delivering it
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
Yeah it's mostly a perception thing actually (for the big companies that buy this and mix agencies + freelancers). For smaller companies, I think the difference is fully outsourced vs work by spec. If you are doing full service then yes, should definitely think of how to increase pricing
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Mo pfp
Mo
@meb
My all time favourite was getting address poisoned on Uniswap app. Obviously not condoning theft, but some of these hacks are so well thought out, I almost feel like the hackers deserve their pay for a job well done
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction