I wrote the first commit for slice-ansi in 2015 to solve a baby problem for a cli framework I was building, and worked with Qix a little on the chalk org after it. It's wild looking back and seeing how these things creep in influence over time.
This is very naive. How many different APIs have you authenticated with and connected to? Just the big ones? What happens when the docs are wrong or incomplete?
> This is very naive. How many different APIs have you authenticated with and connected to? Just the big ones?
I mean, a lot? I have multiple times felt like that was my entire life for weeks or months on end during the past over three decades of doing software development...
(If we expand the scope a bit to network protocols, as opposed to just "APIs", I was even the person who first spiked nmap's protocol scanning and detection logic.)
To wit, I am one of those people who pretty much never use an SDK provided for an API: if I have to, I will rather reverse engineer the protocol using a disassembler.
(This then being part of why I've won millions of dollars in bug bounties, as part of my relentless drive to always operate at the lowest level presented to me.)
But, regardless, can we move past trying to attack my credibility on software, and shift back to more productive forms of analysis? (Why did this become so personal?!)
> What happens when the docs are wrong or incomplete?
If we posit that the documentation for the API is wrong, so we should this MCP description / wrapper, as both were written by the humans charged to enable this function.
And, of course, the real point is whether the task is easier than the thing we are trying to do... even writing a correct tree map is much harder than an API client.
^ Both of these arguments can be made by someone who doesn't even do software development, helping us try to understand why MCP is being hyped up as a new paradigm.
The success rate of this is impractically low. APIs are dirty, inconsistent things. Real-world connection to obscure APIs is a matter of hard sleuthing. Docs are wrong, endpoints are broken, auth is a nightmare. These APIs need to be massaged in advance and given a sanity-wrapper if you want any semblance of reliable success when a model calls them.
This reminds me of a time I lost an argument with John-David Dalton about cleaning up/minifying lodash as an npm dependency, because when including the readme and license for every sub-library, a lodash import came to ~2.5MB at the time. This also took a lot of seeking time for disks because there were so many individual files.
The conversation started and ended at the word cache.
> This also took a lot of seeking time for disks because there were so many individual files.
The fact NPM keeps things in node_modules unzipped seems wild to me. Filesystems are not great at hundreds of thousands of little files. Some are bad, others are terrible.
Zip files are easier to store, take up less space, and CPUs are faster than disks so the decompression in memory is probably faster reading the unzipped files.
That was one of my favorite features of Yarn when I tried it - pnp mode. But since it’s not what NPM does it requires a shim that doesn’t work with all ps mage’s. Or at least didn’t a few years ago.
You don't have to correct throwaway's opinion, you have to correct your online appearance. People reviewing your submission don't know these details you're giving and they won't ask. Unjust or not, that's the shallow first impression he got.
It's like if a user does something wrong in your app, you don't blame or explain to the user what they did wrong. You figure out how to improve your UX.
I came to similar conclusions from your public profile. The defensiveness of your response would be a 7th red flag.
> I came to similar conclusions from your public profile. The defensiveness of your response would be a 7th red flag.
This website is part of my public profile. Allowing people to shape an incorrect narrative of myself on this website is not something I will be doing. Especially when it is coming from anonymous posters who haven't shared their professional credentials.
> you have to correct your online appearance
Obviously I am continuously looking to improve my "online appearance". I disagree with the feedback I've received here. People's emotions are running high on a hot-button topic (immigration and job market woes) so in other locations in this post I'm being called a racist and a conspiracy theorist - I am taking everything here with a grain of salt and doing damage control as anonymous accounts sift through my various online profiles and offer up unsolicited advice. Defending one's position is pretty standard in this situation.
Correcting disinformation ("complaining on linkedin", "no expertise in technology", "political posts", "you're a racist", "you're a conspiracy theorist") is part of maintaining a public profile on the internet.
Lastly, as I stated in my response to the alleged hiring manager with regard to my expertise in technology:
> I guess this isn't shining through on my profiles. Will have to find a way to fix it.
The fact that several people have mentioned your public image might deter them from hiring you should raise some serious concerns. Instead of getting defensive and stubborn, take a moment to reflect. This could explain why you're not receiving callbacks. Insisting that you're right and everyone else is wrong isn't helping you.
Given how competitive the job market is right now, you have a PR issue. It's important to take a deep breath and recognize that people are trying to offer you objective advice.
If you're not willing to improve your public profile, you can't expect to receive interest.
Have you ever had a friend in a terrible relationship, where everyone can see how bad it is except for them? You have a problem with your public image. If you don't think it accurately portrays you, then clean it up. From your post, it seems like you're involved in really interesting projects—why sabotage your good deeds?
Deleting your LinkedIn profile seems a bit extreme. You should be creating it in a very polished way. All you need is one job to come from it or to catch the eye of one recruiter.
You have to play the game. That sucks, but the freewheeling days seem to be over. Play the game or accept you are making the rock you're pushing uphill heavier.
Your advice, and the advice of the people I am defending myself from is worthless. None of you know my situation. I'm laughing every time one of you posts these comments. There's nothing wrong with my public image. Most of the "advice" I have recieved is disinfo, some is is pure speculation based on false information. I don't really care if you see this as stubborn or defensive - I see you anr the other anon "advice givers" as ignorant and incorrect. Pretty funny though.
Deleting LinkedIn isn't extreme in the least. I hate the website and I'm better off without it - its a dying social media platform and i only had the account because a former employer forced me to create it. I am sure wpyou wisuph you could scour it for intel, but I had intended to delete it for months and was only using it to promote my personal projects and my other accounts, and apply to jobs. I monitor all of my sites with Google analytics and was getting very little traffic from LinkedIn, and none of the job applications I put out with LinkedIn panned out due to it being over saturated with applicants - as I said, worthless.
Furthermore, I am correct about H-1B. It is a broken system. This has been acknowledged by businessmen and lawmakers alike on both sides of the aisle. Posting about it on LinkedIn isn't political or complaining. I happen to be connected to extremely influential people. If my posts reached them and swayed their opinion to my side or even got them thinking about it: mission accomplished.
To reiterate, I didn't ask for advice, I asked about OTHER people's experiences as they pertain to racism, ageism and sexism - the fact that people jumped into my personal profiles and started offering up unsolicited commentary reveals their true motivations: trolling. Very unprofessional. Ill-informed "advice" rejected.
I don't need the internet to think for me, it's why I didn't ask, but thanks for contributing to the entertaining echo chamber.
