Comment Re:Obscurantism (Score 1) 111
What a weird thing to say, given that Wikipedia cites The World Factbook constantly; so much so that it even has its own template for usage.
What a weird thing to say, given that Wikipedia cites The World Factbook constantly; so much so that it even has its own template for usage.
Honestly? Everybody, including every software team of any significant size. Likely even your own.
I work in big tech, and it wasn’t for pre-commit and pre-receive hooks, a secret would get committed to GitHub every single day. This has been the case at every large tech company I’ve worked at for the last decade.
Just because youâ(TM)re loud and because you hang out only with loud people doesnâ(TM)t mean youâ(TM)re winning. Twenty years ago, 1% of young people identified as trans. Now itâ(TM)s about 3%, roughly split between trans men and trans women. Heck, the percentage of my state that identifies as trans is now up to 1.6%.
But sure, if your cruelty towards people who donâ(TM)t affect your life makes you feel like you are âoewinningâ and helps you feel better about yourself, by all means carry on.
This is absolutely not what doctors do, as it would be a disaster to use birth sex most of the time. Doctors will typically go by your hormonal gender for most treatments.
I would say this is a pretty reductionist view of what sex is. If you were to draw the blood of a transgender woman, every biological marker in the blood (except for chromosomes) is likely to fall within the female range. A transgender woman is much more likely to be afflicted with diseases that affect women more (e.g. migraines) and much less likely to get diseases that affect men more (e.g. prostate cancer). They can breastfeed, their joints and bones and so many other biological markers follow the progression that cis women would follow.
There is a reason why doctors tend to update the sex marker on charts after someone has been undergoing hormonal care for a while, and that's because to consider them the birth sex means you're likely to provide considerable worse medical care than if you went by birth sex.
While there were, at peak times, around 100 people working on Windows, the Android team recently had hundreds of people laid off, so there must have been many more people working there.
Where did you get "around 100 people working on Windows?"
That is a laughably implausible number, Microsoft has roughly 100k engineers split across five organizations, and a huge chunk of one organization's work is Windows.
Drop back to Firefox a good fifty releases ago and tell me that there hasnâ(TM)t been a ton of improvements. The fact that they are able to build a full web browser with a tiny fraction of the resources spent on Chromium or WebKit is nothing short of a miracle.
Because itâ(TM)s not tiny? 30-50% of internet users use ad blocking software, either as an extension of built into their browser.
Wikipedia does not claim that wind and solar are the sole solutions to climate change, a thing youâ(TM)ve made up in your head. They also have plenty of information about climate change denialism, while noting that there is a near complete lack of scientific evidence supporting their viewpoint. Itâ(TM)s an encyclopedia after all, not a catalog of gut feelings.
Mullenberg was CEO from 2015-2019, long after the bad decisions about the MAXâ(TM)s design were made. Unless you think a guy who was CEO only months before its maiden flight really had that big of an impact on the development process?
The amount of misinformation in this post is pretty astounding.
1. Donations to Mozilla go to the Mozilla Foundation, not Mozilla Corporation, which is who makes Firefox.
2. Pocket does not phone home constantly if you don't use it.
3. Firefox supports more functionality through their webExtension system than Chrome does, I use their TLS bits constantly.
4. Pocket is profitable, it helps support Firefox and not the other way around.
Settings --> Privacy & Security --> Firefox Data Collection, uncheck the boxes.
Is that what qualifies as "difficult and/or time consuming" these days?
Target estimated that the cost of the breach was $200-300M. It didnâ(TM)t bankrupt them, but it was plenty painful.
It affects Chrome and Edge, so I would say there's about a 99.9999% chance that the answer is yes. Yawn.
Thatâ(TM)s a great point, I hope it all works out well for you when the state upstream of yours democratically votes to starting dumping pollution into its waterways.
Computers are useless. They can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso