So focused on making things look good, but spent no time thinking about people actually living in the houses.

But at this point I feel like odds are everyone looking for vulnerabilities is using AI to some extent. Why wouldn't they? It'd be stranger if they didn't.

At least for capitalism, the amount extracted by ad companies is known and taxed.

It's not fair to compare things in practice (captialism), and in theory (whatever you're suggesting).

Those who are wealthier pay more into the tax system, allow those who are less well off to gain access to things they normally wouldn't. This is a good thing.

Likewise, those who are wealthier are buying more products that are advertised, allowing those who are less well off to gain access to the internet for closer-to-free. This is also a good thing.

We can put limits on how advertising is done, give control over your data, etc etc. But the fundamentals stay the same.

So no: paying your way towards internet products won't save the average person money.

1. you have a solid pension

2. you should care about capital gains taxes

3. you're REALLY rich and don't care.

(1) already have enough money to survive without working, or

(2) don't realize how hard of a life it would be to "flip burgers" to make a living in 2026.

We live very good lives as software developers. Don't be a fool and think you could just "flip burgers" and be fine.

What's the difference? I try to make people think I'm intelligent all the time.

I'm not saying you need every plugin ever, but autocomplete?

Maybe you haven't tried "advanced" editors in a while, and it was a lot worse last time you tried?

My answer is simply: It's not a 5 minute regex change.

I'm not even saying it shouldn't be prioritized or isn't worth the effort. Just that you should give the problem a bit more respect.

- Maybe you want to separately invite people to the same thing and have different descriptions, now you're increasing the number of things to equate.

- Maybe a user creates one event that is simply a title and a time, and they then want to create a second one for another purpose. However, it keeps getting deduped and they don't know why. Now you have a user education problem that you have to solve.

- Now you might think: well just make it a toggle in the settings! Okay well now you have to add a new setting and that expands the scope of the project. Do you make it opt-in or opt-out? If it's opt-in, what if no one uses it? Do you maintain the feature if there's a migration? If it's opt-out, you still have the above problems.

I could go on. And this is mostly an exercise of not underestimating a "simple" change. Calendars (and anything involving time) in particular can get very complicated.

As a big tech programmer, it's almost never that simple...

Small edges cases not covered by a one line regex can mean big issues at scale, especially when we're talking about removing things from a calendar.

And there are hints to what the author actually means, like "Each deploy should be owned by the developer who made the code changes."

That just isn't feasible in a system that's of any reasonable size.

"Deploy on every commit" lmao

"Shipping software and running tests should be fast. Super fast. Minutes, tops." hahah