The point being that sometimes things that look “clever” if you only look at the obvious primary effects are not at all clever when you also consider secondary effects.

If only when it comes to “ease of eavesdropping” it might very well be in the best long term interest of the Israeli Security Services that the rest of the World keeps on acquiring Made In Europe and Made In US devices which this action will likely impact (one thing are accusations of “backdoors” in certain devices a whole different thing is seeing on TV a mass attack were a batch of devices all made in a nation allied with Israel contained explosives and that were detonated in all manner of arbitrary places hitting thousands of arbitrary people).

Then there’s the possible impact on Israeli Allies’ exports of electronics given these pagers were specifically manufactured in Hungary (a very strong ally of Israel) by a company licensing the brand name - is it really a good idea for anybody in a political, state or security position in any nation not allied with Israel to buy any device with remote access capabilities from made in any nation allied with Israel or with a significant part of the supply chain passing thorugh one of those nations. If they’re willing to have explosives put in them and detonated in the middle of crowds of civilians, what else are they willing to do - it’s the same reason why buying Security Software from an Israeli company is extremelly stupid for any company (even in allied nations) only now Electronics is also included, there’s very obvious proof that they will do just about anything (rather than merelly an unproven risk of industrial espionage) and the risk also includes things sourced from nations allied with Israel.

Time will tell just how big those two classes of secondary and tertiary effects really are.

Mind you, as I see it anybody who gets in bed with ethno-Fascists like the Zionists deserves all the damage that comes from them having no limits whatsoever to what they’ll do.

They were on TV over here (Portugal) doing a press conference were they explained the devices were made in Hungary by a company which licensed the brand name from them (a Taiwanese company) so the manufacturer’s name (which I totally forgot) is definitely out.

The obvious solution is to just procure their equipment from China only as they are naturally not allied with Israel if only because geostrategicaly they’d adversaries of the top Israeli ally, the US.

Given the indiscriminate nature of this attack this might imply purchasing decisions all over the World from much more than merely “members of groups deemed terrorist by the US”.

Specifically in Hungary, same country that has been voting with Israel in the UN and also has a Fascist government.

It sure makes manufacturing involving explosives much more easily to go ahead if the local government has approved of it.

I’m curious what this will do to the “Made In EU” brand in the rest of the World.

There are several reports that the devices were made with the explosives built-in.

According to the spokesperson of the Taiwanese brand in a press conference, those were all devices produced by a Hungarian licensee of the brand.

Hungary, you know, been voting with Israel in the UN and also has a Fascist government which is massivelly racist against Arabs.

Kind makes sense that those things were manufactured in a country very friendly of Israel and with their authorization, already with the explosis built-in.

The interesting second and third level effects to consider of this are around the impact on things like Globalization (if having to start paying attention to the alliances of the countries the stuff you buy comes from the places which are part of a supply chain stop being irrelevant) and even brand licensing (that Taiwanese company will have their name pop-up associated with this in every single internet search from now on)

Also curious about what will this to to “Made in EU” - Hungary might just have screwed the rest of us much more than ever before.

It depends on the Western country - some are much worse than others when it comes to the whole practice of defining people’s worth mainly from their race.

Some Western nations (maybe most of them in Europe) do tend to see value in all human live, Arab or otherwise, but many to indeed see no value in Arab life.

If I was to point a finger at the worst in Europe I would say Britain, Hungary, Austria and Germany.

Thanks for that very complete view of things.

Things are quite different since I last was doing hiring, which was pre-COVID.

Yeah, my experience leading a remoted team in India also showed the importance of cultural awareness and good requirements: I ultimately got into the habit of, after the big meeting with the boss were all the work was given to the various teams, get my guys individually on the phone (so that they feared not “losing face”) and carefully coach out of them any questions or doubts since otherwise they wouldn’t voice them and just end up implementing something they misunderstood or which wasn’t explained correctly and indeed they also needed very detailed requirements which was a problem because the senior guys on the other side who ended up having to write said requirements could pretty much have done the job themselves in that time.

This was a big Investment Bank and some top level manager in NY decided to create a division in India to outsource work to, but it definitely didn’t get the cream of the crop over there and the career structuring there was so shit that the few good techies we got would quickly end up as (bad) managers - their pay scales followed the stupid idea that “nobody can be paid more than management” so good mid level techies had to become junior managers to earn more, and they invariably were crap as managers.

Having spent most of my career working as a senior contractor, which often meant landing on code bases with 3+ layers of fuckups, I can only imagine how painful it will be to end up having to clean and fix AI generated code, since that doesn’t even have a consistent coding style or pattern of design errors and bugs.

More specifically: the same kind of decision makers are behind both.

I see. That does change the idea I had about things a bit.

It’s been a while since I was last hiring.

I wasn’t aware that the problem nowadays in the West (or at least the US) was an excess of people who don’t really have a natural skill for it choosing software development as a career.

That kind of thing was one of the main problems with outsourcing to India maybe a decade ago: the profession was comparatively very well paid for the country so it attracted far too many people without the right skills resulting in a really low average quality of the programmers there - India had really good programmers just like everywhere else but then had a ton of people also working as programmers who should never had gone into it, so the experience of those having to deal with outsourced programming in India usually was pretty bad (I remotelly was a technical lead for a small outsourced team in India from London, and they were really bad whilst, curiously, the good programmers from the Indian Subcontinent I worked with had emigrated from there and were working in London and New York).

I think it’s even worse than just the bar for competency going up: even for a coding wizard going into the career, it’s a lot harder to squeeze through the bottleneck which is getting an entry level position nowadays unless they have some public proof out on the Net of how good they’re at coding (say, commits in open source projects, your own public projects, or even Youtube videos about it).

This is something that will negativelly impact perfectly capable young developers who have an introvert personality type (which are most of them in my experience, even in domains such as Hacking) since some of the upsides of Introversion are a greater capacity for really focusing on on things and for detailed analysis - both things that make for the best programmers - and self publicising isn’t a part of the required skillset for good developers (though sooner or later the best ones will have to learn some “image management” if they end up in the Corporate world)

I’m a bit torn on this since on one side salesmanship being more of a criteria determining one’s chances of getting a break at the start of one’s career as a developer is bad news (good coding and good salesmanship tend to be inverselly correlated) but on the other side a junior developer with some experience actually working with other people on real projects with real users (because they contributed to existing open source projects) has already started learning what we have to teach fresh-out-of-Uni developers to make them professionals.

Sound like a variant of the good old saying “pay peanuts, get monkeys” only using a stick and threats instead of payment.

Mind you, it does sound like the kind of think somebody with his kind of personality - narcissistic shameless and dishonest salesman - would think it’s a great idea.

In my experience working for almost 3 decades in software development, passive-agressive shit from upper management just causes the best people to leave (as they’re the ones who easilly find better jobs) leaving behind mainly a mix of the incompetent and those who never worked anywhere else (who are either already incompetent or will become so, as only ever having worked in just one company is far too narrow professional experience for anything beyond junior/mid level - you need to have seen more than one way of doing things to understand certain higher level concerns and choices in software development).

The one time some manager voiced such an idea, I very overtly in front of everybody offered to make “loop unrolling” software working at the source level (compilers already do it at the Assembly level in some cases for performance) for me and my colleagues to really boost that code line count (while totally screwing maintenability).

Mind you, all devs in that meeting were loudly against measuring performance by code lines, but I like to think that suggestion of mine really hammered down the coup the grace on that “brilliant” idea.

I’ve worked as a freelancer (specifically as a Contractor) in Software Development for over a decade and more often than not I ended up having to work with some existing code base, having to deal with the design choices, coding style and bugs of somebody else, often multiple somebody elses.

There’s nothing quite as “entertaining” as having to deal with 3+ different code and design styles in the same code base because all previous developer thought their own way of doing things was the superior way so just added one more layer of their style (not just coding but, worse, software design) on top of what was already there increasing the mess, rather than work within the existing structure and style and doing some refactoring.

Anyway, in my experience having to read, understand and work with existing code that you yourself did not made is way more time costly and less pleasant than actually doing your stuff from scratch.

Outsourcing killed a lot of the junior and even mid-level career level opportunities in CS and AI seems on track to do the same.

The downside is that going into CS now (and having gone into CS in the last decade or so, especially in English-speaking countries) was basically the career equivalent of just out of the starting line running full speed into a brick wall.

The upside is that for anybody who now is a senior techie things have never been this good because there are significantly fewer people at that level than there is need for such people, since in the last decade or so a lot of people haven’t had the chance to progress in their careers to that point.

Whilst personally this benefits me, I’m totally against this shit and what it has done to the kids entering my career.

I have the impression that most people (or maybe it’s my faith in Humanity that’s at an all time low and it’s really just “some people”) just want pre-chewed explanations given to them rather than spend time and energy figuring things out themselves - basically baby pap as ideas food rather than cooking their own ideas food out of raw ingredients.

Certainly that would help explain the resurgence of Populist sloganeering and continued popularity of Religion (with it’s ever popular simple explanations of “Deity did it” and “it’s the will of Deity”)

Critical thinking, especially Skepticism, does not make for good Consumers or mindless followers of Political Tribes.

Middle and upper management are like little children - they’ll only learn that fire hurts by putting their hand in it.

Good programmers (and I don’t mean just at the coding level) make less bugs exactly because they want to avoid bug fixing as much as possible.

They still have to do debugging - and hence have to be good at it - just less often than if they didn’t invest any time into figuring out ways of working that reduce the rate of bugs in their work (and, again, this is at more levels than just coding).

I think that misconception of “good coders do not produce bugs” in anchored in the totally wrong idea that it’s at all possible to make code without bugs - the way I see it the path to being a “good coder” must go through being good at debugging and just wanting to avoid doing it as much because how how much more time it takes to have to go all the way down to using the debugger to find bugs than doing things like at least some analysis upfront of the program requirements, using proper naming conventions to reduce the likelihood of the kind of bugs that comes from confusing variables and structuring you code so that you don’t get lost or don’t forget things (especially for code you don’t see for months and later come back to having forgotten the logic you were following with it).

I’ve done some programming without proper debuggers (embedded stuff in shitty shit microcontrollers, shader programming) and it’s a total PITA.