and no one irl even has the decency to agree with me because it’s so fucking drilled into the culture that these fucking BuNsInNesSes have a Right to do this because it’s a bSUsniEss. like oh yeah they have an office building so they definitely get to analyze my piss because they say they want to. sick fucking freaks.

preaching to the choir a bit on lemmy (or i would hope so at least) but still

  • Iceblade@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Many desk jobs would probably be reasonable to have testing on as well. People don’t realize how critical software is today. That same piece of heavy machinery has a cpu with thousands of lines of code sitting between the operator and the actual machinery.

    • CephaloPOTUS@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wow you are exactly what he is complaining about. It’s not like the guy is coding live and each keystroke goes directly to the machine. What risk is it to people if a couple years ago one of the guys typing keys that would later get tested like crazy was high?

      • hardaysknight@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean, there are applications where that could be the case. I program PLC’s for a living. Sometimes on live machines running in a plant.

        I don’t agree with his overall viewpoint, but he does have a point in this case.

        • AMDIsOurLord@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you’re committing on live then I have some choice words for the company you work for and the practices you’ve been taught

      • Iceblade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Cheese theory. You want as many layers of protection between creation and execution. Bugs will inevitably slip through tests, and reducing the number that are created before testing will inherently reduce the number that slip through. In some fields preventing just one bug might save many lives.

        I would not limit it to coders however - a lawyer screwing up their defense, a coked up billion dollar CEO disregarding the wider effects of a major decision, an insurance agent making a wrong decision etc. etc.

        The irony is that people higher up in the chain of command, whose decisions affect far more people, often slip by without being tested whilst the bottom-feeder who gets fired after a fuckup that affects a single person is hounded to the ends of the earth.

    • pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I work in IT and about half the workforce smokes weed. I worked at a high frequency stock trading firm in NYC that made hundreds of millions of dollars per year and tons of the developers were high during work hours. We had quarterly open bar parties where the CEO himself would openly smoke weed.

      Being high on THC doesn’t have the same effect on someone that is drunk, all coked up, or doped up on opiates. Smoking weed tends to open up people’s creative sides and it reduces stress and anxiety when something isn’t working the way you want it to. The same can’t be said for the others because they impair your ability to focus, your vision, and decision making.

      Also as someone else said, there are only a few positions where being high as hell can seriously impact the company. Most of the time the stuff you do doesn’t have that much of an impact on the company in general.