It's hard to grapple with the degree of the offense. It is offensive. Imagine a small village a couple hundred years ago with a central square and something like a bulletin board. Someone paints an explicit painting using a village youth's face an puts it on the bulletin board. That's going to create quite a stir, and maybe a lynch mob. I don't want to trivialize the offense.
That said, there's the question of where the line is drawn. If I clip from a biology textbook an image of a nude woman, and I clip the Gerber baby's head and paste it onto the nude woman's head, what is that? If I generate the face of a young boy, then draw a stick figure under it and give the stick figure a stick erection, what is that? I don't know. I mean these things are weird and offensive, but to what degree?
In case it helps anyone tinkering with XML and C#, Visual Studio has a feature in the menu to "paste xml as classes". That can be quite handy if you're going to be deserializing it.
As a counter point, it may be quite subtle and hard to notice what goes wrong when you remove something to see what happens. Imagine you see a large sql query that has a bit of logic that doesn't make sense to you. If you go change it without knowing why it was that way, and users keep on using report output from that query, who is going to notice when they get 982 records in their report instead of 983 one day? It's easy to spot when erroneous data APPEARS, but it's a lot harder to notice when valid data DISAPPEARS. Oh, they really did have a good reason to use outer apply instead of cross apply, there. Oops.
This seems reasonable to me. Devs and BAs flesh out business processes and ultimately document decisions in our Jira issue comments. When you have an issue id handy, it's not that hard to go read what the rationale was for a feature.
I have been ignoring Jira's AI summary, but I suppose that could be useful if the comments were very long.
I agree. If we look to music, how can a musician unhear what they've heard? We celebrate musicians when they cite their influences. In the case of a software library, it is a tool, not a work of art. Its beauty is in accomplishing a specific, useful task. If we can accept musicians drawing inspiration from all the music they've ever listened to, we should be able to do the same for software, especially when its internal code is unrecognizable from a similar tool.
We are currently at a point where the master furniture craftsmen are doing quality assurance at the new automated furniture factory. Eventually, everyone working at the factory will have never made any furniture by hand and will have grown up sitting on janky chairs, and they will be the ones supervising.
The soap opera effect drives me nuts. I just about can't watch something when it's on. It makes a multimillion dollar movie look like it was slapped together in an afternoon.
Why don't you invest in some 3D scanning equipment/software. Build the physical object or close to it, then scan it and tweak it in software, doing the whole process backwards.
The analogy is strained. Software is closer to a food recipe than a building. Trying to make a 3-layer strawberry banana cake with pineapple frosting? You are going to have to bake something and taste it to see if your recipe is any good. Then make some adjustments and bake some more.
I've got loads of Notepad++ tabs open for various things. No concerns about having to save them as they auto save, and they persist if the system reboots for whatever reason. Other than that, I just use indentation to organize related items.
That said, there's the question of where the line is drawn. If I clip from a biology textbook an image of a nude woman, and I clip the Gerber baby's head and paste it onto the nude woman's head, what is that? If I generate the face of a young boy, then draw a stick figure under it and give the stick figure a stick erection, what is that? I don't know. I mean these things are weird and offensive, but to what degree?