Technology
News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.
What doesn't fit here?
The core of the story has to be technology focused.
- If article mentions "AI" in a sentence and then talks about business economics that doesn't make it tech news.
- Gaming is too many layers removed from technology. There are many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Transporation is too many layers removed from technology. EVs while use many cool technologies have many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Entertainment is too many layers removed from technology. While sometimes it can fit here, business or cultural aspects of it are a better fit for dedicated communities.
- Cybersecurity. While it heavily focuses on technology, most of the time it's too technical for most people who are not already invested in it. Should be posted in a dedicated communities unless it has broader connection to other tech areas.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefix
Country prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
view the rest of the comments
Yeah performance, security, etc., is always a low priority in software departments. All work generally have to get funded by some current or expected income specifically linked to that work. Things are never linked to cost of NOT doing the work. It's always assumed that there's no cost to not doing something. This is a huge flaw in moderne business practices in general as the only thing that matters is current revenue for purposes of stock price or the companies value to investors. In software this means that any work is generally tied to some feature requested by upper management and usually connected to some sale or otherwise linked to expected income. And that means every new feature gets a limited budget and generally in the end, cost cutting trims that down before delivery, but instead of cutting business features, they have to cut things like performance and security testing and development. Those end up as "technical debt", but there is almost never any income that gets tied to those unless there's a lawsuit or other legal requirement that forces the company to fund those things. The whole idea of a department having to "sell" every piece of work to a "internal customer" so they can get money from the organization is a ridiculous idea. It's all the same company's money, there's no actual customer and the whole bureaucracy to support all of that is a huge waste of time and money that could be put into the longterm health of the company. But longterm health isn't important anymore in so many industries because consolidation and legal maneuvering has removed most competition in many industries.