To be clear, the "work" was a demo for the car company. But because the Tizen source didn't compile, that demo had to be more rigged than normal.
I worked on a contract in which an auto manufacturer was trying to use that abomination, and we could never even get the source to compile. Literally a year later, it came out that Samsung was trying to use both git/gerrit and Perforce as version control for it, mixed between different teams:
Time went by and Bad Things started to appear. Git/gerrit was official in some teams, but Perforce was official in other teams (even working on the same component). Some patches went there, some there. The management finally decided Perforce code should be used as THE source for building OS images. Again, they only forgot to tell everyone else to stop using git
Both repositories diverged to the point of being almost incompatible. Issues in Perforce code were given to git teams, which resulted in a litany of WTFs. After all, there’s not many things more fun than being tasked with fixing a bug in code that you physically don’t have. ASAP. Meetings took place, arrangements were made to rectify the situation. Months later, the situation is still the same.
One implication was code review process. With gerrit in place, that was a non-issue. But the Korean teams didn’t (and still don’t) understand the notion of code review and pushed everything directly to the repo. The quality of some patches was so bad that enforcing code review became top priority for non-Korean teams. Finally, a solution was developed – MS Word based code review. Each changeset needs to be attached to a bug in the tracker. Each bug can have a Word document attached with a request for code review. That document is a three pages long form with information so useless, nobody even wants to read it. At the end there’s a place for copy-pasting a diff for each file changed, with the explanation why. Reviewers are supposed to fill a Word form with details about which line they comment on and what their issue with it is.
Submitting a patch, clicking through the awful issue tracker and filling the form takes literal hours. All this because using git with gerrit was too tough. Fortunately, the review form has fields listing times taken by various steps in fixing a bug. Maybe someday someone will read how long pushing the code actually takes.
No, they won’t.
Luckily, that contract was short term. But because I put it on my resume, I got a few head-hunters inquiring about it. Quickly though, interest waned. Not hard to see why...
Four out of five elderly people given CPR end up dying within days. Many of them with prolonged and intense suffering due to CPR prolonging the inevitable.
We certainly need more thought about end-of-life care, living wills, and do-not-resuscitate orders. But CPR is not the only intervention affected by that.
And in some cases CPR is given when it's not warranted, breaking ribs, collapsing lungs or otherwise causing serious and sometimes fatal damage.
Sometimes, yes, but more rarely than you might think.
If I keel over, please don't resuscitate unless there is at least a 50% chance of long-term success, and less than a 50% chance of causing long-term damage.
Dude, unless you're already in the hospital, whoever sees you go down or trips over your unconscious body does not have your medical history, nor can they predict your course of treatment.
We're collectively producing more rice than we eat. Japan is stockpiling unused rice every year, and the world markets are flooded with cheap rice. Food insufficiency (starvation, malnutrition) is currently a problem of resource allocation, not production.
At the same time, the consumers in the big rice consuming countries aren't eating just "rice". You can typically find many dozens of very specific breeds of rice with differences in flavour, texture, firmness, size and so on. And that's within a single type (Japonica, say).
I suspect this would only be useful for rice grown for feed or as an industrial crop. But for feed, source of starch and so on there are already other, well entrenched crops available, so I don't see much of a practical impact of this development.
What is the alternate solution? Are you willing to pay for a subscription to every site you visit? Do you want more "native content" intermixed with all these articles?
Or, you know, less content. It's not as if we're all sitting around wishing there was more stuff on the internet to read, right?
We pay a monthly subscription for our online daily newspaper. I occasionally pay for things such as printed anthologies of online comics I follow, buy books by authors whose blogs and articles I read. I subscribe to a couple of websites.
At one end there is high-quality content such as newspapers (which is high quality in my home country) and other stuff like I listed above. Stuff that is good enough that people really do want to pay for it.
At the other end a lot of people out there are creating good stuff completely for free. You've got academics, programmers and other professionals with a day job that write to spread what they learn. You've got hobbyists sharing their passion. Small businesses publishing good stuff to promote their name and skills. Factual events are widely and freely reported.
The content farms, clickbait sites and the rest out there is squeezed between these two. The high-quality stuff sets the bar for what people expect in order to part with their money. The free stuff sets the bar on what people accept before they abandon you and leave for better sources.
If your business depends on having so much advertising that it drives people to block stuff or leave, then you have no business being in business at all.
Seems like people running mailing lists need to take a look at how spam filters work, rather than mail providers changing anything.
No, you're backwards. It's up to spam filter developers to understand how mailing lists work and not falsely flag legitimate traffic. If your filter breaks a mailing list, your filter is broken.
It is stealing, though. They retain the copyright. Saying it's not stealing is like saying taking an unlocked bicycle off the street isn't stealing.
Iran: Never invaded anyone
Because the only place they might consider invading would nuke them into slag.
never used weapons of mass destruction...
Because we've prevented them from getting WMDs or anything else that would allow them to pose a serious threat.
The entire point of everyone having a gun is so the GOVERNMENT is not safe - from the people.
Oh give it a fucking rest you American Gun Nut Anonymous Coward. The government has drones, warthogs and TANKS. You really think the Colt 45 you keep under your pillow and caress every night before falling asleep is going to make a difference?
Now go away and watch your VHS copy of Red Dawn again and leave the rest of us in peace.
Have you seen the Iraqi military in action lately?
Saudi Arabia has 200,000 active-duty military personnel, in a country led by old men who consider the middle ages to be a little too progressive for their liking.
Google Maps puts inappropriate weight towards making a route more complicated with short freeway hops
I wouldn't exclusively blame Google for this though.
I travel regularly to the USA on business, and I've used rental GPSes (Garmin / TomTom) as well as Apple and Google services on my phones. They all seem to do this equally - I'm always puzzled why I'm merging on and off in a 1/4 mile....
Just last week I overheard someone commenting on how their text messages were going via satellite.
It is easy to look like victim and bully peoples [sic]
You just quote the parent in your reply and presto problem solved.