I think it's also meant to protect from potential mistakes in handling of hard disk decommissioning which presumably is a common thing with data centers.

Used to be, but e.g. where I work any decommissioned drive has to be DBANed (if it's spinning platters) or secure-erased (SSDs). If it can't be for some reason (e.g. it has failed) it needs to be physically destroyed. I would hope most data centers have similar policies in 2026, but that may be optimistic I guess.

When the company that owns the physical hardware goes out of business, all of this stuff is moot.

Copilot cannot be behind any models because it's a harness, not a model. You can use any of the popular models through it, including Claude models. Though people have been saying that Claude CLI is a better experience.

Same experience with UI performance, especially on Linux (Fedora). I went back to Zen Browser because of this, but frankly most browsers are performing worse for me on Linux than on Windows.

I installed Zed on a work machine at a well-known software company and a week later they forced me to reimage my machine because they got some alert that the app was attempting to access browser credentials :(

No shade on Zed, sometimes in-house security tools just don't like new software.

> they got some alert that the app was attempting to access browser credentials :(

That sounds pretty specific.

According to the email I initially received for this alert, zed.exe was attempting to access its own folder within the AppData directory. Nothing more normal than that, no?

No idea how that related to what I was told by the sec people shortly afterwards.

Possibly an abundance of caution based on the behavior in the other comments?

As with regex, querying is about not getting what you don't want as much as it is about getting what you want. And the former of the two is much more difficult to verify.

I don't want to paint your comment as pro-AI brigading, but in the solution to any problem, considering the collaterals is a pillar principle of engineering. You don't get praise for solving a bug infestation problem by nuking the city.

I feel some of the recent HackerNews stories start leaning a bit too much toward using AI regardless of whether it makes sense. A solution to any problem, however interesting or clever should be critiqued holistically, alternatives included.

I don't think performance advice should be part of a general architectural principles list, so I don't think that's what they meant. Otherwise might as well add "avoid nested loops", etc, and then it devolves into a general programming advice list.

Performance is and always was something dependent on the domain rules. You don't start architecting for performance before understanding requirements so why make it a pillar of all architecture.

Not sure if it's a joke, but twins don't have the same biometrics

Well I stand corrected.

I thought that the fingerprints/iris in twins where identical like the DNA.

Bottom line is the people described as hypocritical in the comment have no principles, but rather feign passion in anything they think other people consider valuable. When devs thought coding skill was valuable, that's what they claimed to be passionate about, when the game changed and communication became key, they suddenly changed their passion. Either the timing is a coincidence, or they are hypocrites.

I don't think switching one's passion on a dime is a valid escape hatch from hypocrisy.

You're trying to turn flexibility and the ability to adapt to new circumstances into a vice.

You're wrong. It's a virtue.

Adaptability is a virtue, flip flopping is being disingenuous.

They said 2 years after purchase. So that's where the debate is. How long should we hold manufacturers accountable for in regards to waterproofing? 1 year, 2 years, forever?