Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A single line of code cost $8000

pietrasiak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 423 posts

Re: A single line of code cost $8000

#251

Post by Hikikomori »

zahlman wrote: post #194
mieko wrote: post #114

For people finding this thread via web search in the future: screen.studio is macOS screen recording software that checks for updates every five minutes. Somehow, that alone is NOT the bug described in this post. The /other/ bug described in this blog is: their software also downloaded a 250MB update file every five minutes. The software developers there consider all of this normal except the actual download, which c…

Not everyone even has an Internet connection that can reliably download 250MB in 5 minutes. Yes, even in metropolitan areas in developed countries in 2025.

Even doable on very long range ADSL, guess there are still some dialup users.

Re: A single line of code cost $8000

#253

Post by zarzavat »

alias_neo wrote: post #104
canucker2016 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...And if there's no one around to review the code? The website makes it seem like it's a one person shop.

When I work on my own code, at home, with no-one to assist or review, I write tests, and open a PR anyway, and review it myself, sometimes the next day with fresh eyes, or even 10 minutes later after a quick walk in and out of the room and a glass of water. If you're not confident you can review a piece of code you wrote and spot a potentially disastrous bug like the one in OP, write more tests.

Humans are very good at not spotting their own mistakes, that's why writers have editors.

Re: A single line of code cost $8000

#254

Post by latexr »

monkeyelite wrote: post #249
latexr wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Code reviews kill velocity This feels like a strange sense of priorities which would be satirised in a New Yorker/Far Side single-panel comic: “Sure, my mistake brought down the business and killed a dozen people, but I’m not sure you appreciate how fast I did it”. Code should be correct and efficient. Monkeys banging their heads against a keyboard may produce code fast, but it will be brittle and you’ll have to pa…

> would be satirised in a New Yorker/Far Side single-panel comic: Thanks for taking my experience and comment seriously and challenging your preconceptions. > Code should be correct and efficient. When it ships to customers. The goal is to find the bugs before then. Having a stable branch can be accomplished in many ways besides gating each merge with a review. Do you have any studies to show how effective synchronou…

> Thanks for taking my experience and comment seriously and challenging your preconceptions.

I apologise if my comment read as mean. I wanted to make the joke and it may have overshadowed the point.

> Do you have any studies to show how effective synchronous code review is in preventing mistakes?

I could’ve been clearer. I’m not advocating for code reviews, I’m advocating for not placing “velocity” so high on the list of priorities.

> If they are such a good idea why not do 2 or 3?

This argument doesn‘t really make sense, though. You’ve probably heard the expression “measure twice, cut once”—you don’t keep measuring over and over, you do it just enough to ensure it’s right.

Re: A single line of code cost $8000

#255

Post by zahlman »

Hikikomori wrote: post #251
zahlman wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone even has an Internet connection that can reliably download 250MB in 5 minutes. Yes, even in metropolitan areas in developed countries in 2025.

Even doable on very long range ADSL, guess there are still some dialup users.

Not dialup. Just bad last-mile wiring, as far as I can tell.

Apparently such service is still somehow available; I found https://www.dialup4less.com with a web search. Sounds more like a novelty at this point. But "real" internet service still just doesn't work as well as it's supposed to in some places.

Re: A single line of code cost $8000

#256

Post by monkeyelite »

latexr wrote: post #254
monkeyelite wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> would be satirised in a New Yorker/Far Side single-panel comic: Thanks for taking my experience and comment seriously and challenging your preconceptions. > Code should be correct and efficient. When it ships to customers. The goal is to find the bugs before then. Having a stable branch can be accomplished in many ways besides gating each merge with a review. Do you have any studies to show how effective synchronou…

> Thanks for taking my experience and comment seriously and challenging your preconceptions. I apologise if my comment read as mean. I wanted to make the joke and it may have overshadowed the point. > Do you have any studies to show how effective synchronous code review is in preventing mistakes? I could’ve been clearer. I’m not advocating for code reviews, I’m advocating for not placing “velocity” so high on the lis…

> I’m not advocating for code reviews.

Well my comment is against synchronous code reviews. So we are not in disagreement.

> you do it just enough to ensure it’s right.

I agree. Each layer of review etc is a cost and has benefits. You want to pick an appropriate level.

Re: A single line of code cost $8000

#258

Post by EvanAnderson »

pixl97 wrote: post #176
ryandrake wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about never? If I want to update my software, I'll update it. I don't need the application itself to hound me about it, at any frequency.

Because historically your average user will not update the software and then some worm is going about causing massive damage all over the internet.

This is overblown fear mongering, especially for desktop apps.

There are only a few applications with exposed attack surface (i.e. accept incoming requests from the network) and a large enough install base to cause "massive damage all of the Internet". A desktop screen recorder app has no business being constructed in a manner that's "wormable", nor an install base that would result in significant replication.

The software that we need the "average user" to update is stuff like operating systems. OS "manufacturers" have that mostly covered for desktop OS's now.

Microsoft, even though their Customers were hit with the "SQL Slammer" worm, doesn't force automatic updates for the SQL Server. Likewise, they restrict forcing updates only to mainstream desktop OS SKUs. Their server, embedded, and "Enterprise" OS SKUs can be configured to never update.

Re: A single line of code cost $8000

#259

Post by mlyle »

Hikikomori wrote: post #251
zahlman wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not everyone even has an Internet connection that can reliably download 250MB in 5 minutes. Yes, even in metropolitan areas in developed countries in 2025.

Even doable on very long range ADSL, guess there are still some dialup users.

That's 6.5 megabits/second, plus overhead. Many DSL circuits exceed this, but not all.

Re: A single line of code cost $8000

#260

Post by loeg »

monkeyelite wrote: post #228
Capricorn2481 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Code reviews kill velocity - introduce context switching, and are make work This is the same point three times, and I don't agree with it. This is like saying tests kill velocity, there's nothing high velocity about introducing bugs to your code base. Everything introduces context switching, there's nothing special about code reviews that makes it worse than answering emails, but I'm not going to ignore an importan…

> This is the same point three times No it isn’t. Fake work, synchronization, and context switching are all separate problems. > code reviews are a way to catch those I said you can do reviews - but there is no reason to stop work to do them. Why not require two or three reviews if they are so helpful at finding mistakes? I agree everyone makes mistakes - that’s why I would design a process around fixing mistakes, no…

> Why not require two or three reviews if they are so helpful at finding mistakes?

Diminishing returns, of course. I have worked places where two reviews were required and it was not especially more burdensome than one, though.

I catch so many major errors in code review ~every day that it's bizarre to me that someone is advocating for zero code review.

Post reply on HN