The Elephant In The Room

Honey, grab the popcorn! We've got a group claiming they can overthrow the government but can't even secure their database! 🍿 The absolute AUDACITY of having "Department of Government Efficiency" with a dollar sign logo while exposing their database to the world is just *chef's kiss* ironic perfection. Nothing says "trust us with national security" quite like a glaring "THESE 'EXPERTS' LEFT THEIR DATABASE OPEN" warning plastered across your fake government site. If your coup's cybersecurity strategy is equivalent to leaving your front door wide open with a neon "PLEASE ROB ME" sign, maybe reconsider your career in overthrowing democracy? Just saying! 💅

Content Ijust wanted to add to this discussion that I am just compiling on VS and GCC, and used to use include guards. I have now switched to pragma once, and the only reason for me is not 199 performance or portability or standard as I don't really care what is standard as long as VS and GCC support it, and that is that: pragma once reduces possibilities for bugs. It is all too easy to copy and paste a header file to another header file, modify it to suit ones needs, and forget to change the name of the include guard. Once both are included, it takes you a while to track down the error, as the error messages arent necessarily clear. Share Follow edited Nov 30, 2014 at 9:57 answered Jul 22, 2011 at 16:55 Cookie 11.7k 13 52 81 5 This is the correct reason. Forget performance--we should use pragma once because it's less error prone. It occurs to me that if compilers are already tracking include guards, they're already doing most of the work necessary to issue warnings when they see different files using the same macro name. - rieux Jun 13, 2019 at 6:36 Add a comment pragma once has unfixable bugs. It should never be used. 169 If your include search path is sufficiently complicated, the compiler may be unable to tell the difference between two headers with the same basename (e.g. afoo.h and bfoo.h), so a pragma once in one of them will suppress both. It may also be unable to tell that two different relative includes (e.g. include "foo.h" and include "..afoo.h" refer to the same file, so pragma once will fail to suppress a redundant include when it should have. lanc arca attocic tho commorc amia

Content Kyle KylePlantEmoji Website: enter your new password Me: typing h-u-n-t-e-r-2 Website: confirm your password Me: h- Website: the passwords have to match you absolute idiot. You fucking smoothbrained numbskull. Log the fuck off

The perfect confession doesn't exi— That moment when you casually nuke an entire database with a single command and then have to explain yourself in the most professional "I messed up but I'm still employable" way possible. The real hero here is the 5-second pause before responding. That's where the developer frantically Googled "how to recover dropped database" and "jobs in different industry" simultaneously. Prisma migrations: because sometimes you just want to watch the world burn without leaving your terminal. At least they owned up to choosing the "nuclear option" — which is developer speak for "I could have done this carefully, but decided chaos was more efficient."

Content CHLO chlothegod Y'all pronounce it data or data? RJ itsrjhill I'm mad that I read these words in two different ways... but you're trippin if you think it's data and not data Twitter: chlothegod

Sure, install a whole package to generate a unique ID when Date.now() is sitting right there, ready to create timestamp collisions in your production database. Nothing says "senior developer" like using the current millisecond as your primary key. Who needs data integrity when you can have simplicity? Five years later when two users click submit at the exact same millisecond, you'll remember this meme while updating your resume.