C4stor

The fact the google ads doesn't allow to do a real location targeting but will show ads to anyone "interested" in that location is usually a non-starter for me.

Having people all over the world shown an ad for a specifically localized shop ? No thanks !

For more online businesses, the results are indeed quite decent !

If they had fun, they had fun, and it's great.

I don't like Monopoly, you may not like it, but please, let OP like it if he wants. What's even the point of your remark ? It's great that they had a great experience, and that's what's important !

If you do nothing, it lands by default on the "git operations" view, which is by far the most stable, since, well, it consists of executing the battle-tested git program.

If you want to see more the state of github "extras", you'd need to select "github actions" or "webhooks", which have a fair amount of downtime (about once a week or so, which seems about right).

Interesting how the most stable component of the company is the open source one of course ^^

Of course it can, it all depends on the actual proportions in each reaction.

Most notably of the share of CO2 in each, which aims to be drastically different.

> and it being tolerated

Well the persons responsibles for stripping the Air France HR guy got 3 to 4 months jail sentences, so I don't know if I would call that "tolerated".

At the same time, in the US there's litterally an idiom for starting to kill your coworkers if I'm correct : "going postal".

So, overall, I prefer the most violent thing to happen at work to be shirt stripping.

Existing cases counts are at worst fantasist, at best state and policy dependent. You can't compare case counts between countries.

Then what you're missing is that sweden case counting method report very low numbers (either that or their mortality rate is absurdly high, which seems more unlikely).

Well, maybe scala conferences are hosted and attended by people who are interested in those concepts and find them attractive to talk about ? "conference people" just develop their own meta over time

Also, I just clicked on the most recent conference on clojure.org : https://clojured.de/schedule/ , and there is a talk mentioning monads while promising to not talk about monads :-D So it kind of reinforce my point that basic theoretical concepts are silently everywhere ^^ (and fully not necessary for almost everything).

But I don't think conferences are representative of the "on the ground production experience" that you have, or at least can have.

I personnaly wouldn't submit a paper to a conference with a talk "Here's how I made a whole backend stack using boring scala, and it just works" because as you say, I feel it's just full of theoretical speakers and that wouldn't interest anyone. Meanwhile, I also did code a whole backend in boring scala, and it in fact just works, and it feels good :-)

You do see those concepts everywhere.

monads : stuff which kind of encapsulate other things, but you can still nicely manipulate both the thing and the stuff. Let's say, lists.

monoids : set of things where you kind of can add one to another. Let's say, numbers

isomorphisms : functions where there is exactly as many outputs possible than there are possible inputs. Let's say, adding 1 to a number. It's kind of useful knowing whether or not a function is an isomorphism (hello, hash collisions !).

Those concepts aren't specific to any programming language in fact, and are in fact everywhere. You just don't need to explicit them to use them, expliciting them is an option (even in Scala) which allows you to do meta manipulations on them (which Scala doesn't require, and doesn't even really suggest since none are part of the standard lib).

Since they are necessary, there's no option to avoid them anyway ? (otherwise they wouldn't be necessary). So you'd rather accept them.

But the integration by parts article still starts with a very simple sentence, and has a nice colored graphic for comprehension. This is a clear example of "simple and accessible".

It quickly helps forging an intuition of the new concept, using phrases like "Thus integration by parts may be thought of as deriving the area of the blue region from the area of rectangles and that of the red region." which are not very mathematicallish.

All the while, it's a good article for maths people.

Once again, in a great article, what should be simple and explained is not prior knowledge, but the new concept introduced.

But is training + market rate more expensive than hiring + market rate ?

Also, it seems to ignore the fact that training people is actually an incredibly useful thing to do to hone your skills as a senior dev, and that having to teach forces you to cristallize, simplify and explain thoughts and processes that you possibly never challenged before.

Tbh, I think I'm more productive and learning more when I have a decent intern to coach in my team than otherwise. So it's really a win-win situation.

If only companies had a way to escape the arbitration system... oh wait, they self select this system even though there's nothing forcing them to !

Arbitration is a tool, but it's totally unfair to say it's used by anyone else than the company choosing it.

This a the fallacy of choice in action. People who want to learn about a subject at depth are still helped by simple and accessible descriptions. Simple doesn't have to mean wrong, but can rather mean "a human invested a lot of thoughts producing those words so that all others don't have to". This is in my opinion the great way of doing simple, and it definitely has its place on wikipedia.

If you're not convinced, even professional scientists themselves regularly publish and read "review papers" which are pretty much papers doing no research other than summariing and simplifying the current state of the research in their field.

Sure, why not ? Let's consider for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linezolid , it's quite clear what it's used for but if you dive in the "Interactions" paragraph for example, it's definetely not a dumbed down article overall.

And yet, 21 hours after making this remark, noone cared enough to edit the article to include the "great description".

Wikipedia isn't magical. If you don't care enough to edit it, it won't include the information you'd like to see.

Ok, makes sense then !

In France, when I was a student, it was quite often a matter of "we take 10 interns but have only one full time position afterwards, so good luck to everyone !", so it was staying in the company that proved quite competitive.

I wonder how significant it is in the US, but in France, securing an internship is hardly difficult.

Interns tend to barely get paid (when they do) and a lot of companies have no problem letting them rot for half of the internship duration.

You could probably get an internship almost anywhere if you're willing to do the most annoying crap half of the day, and nothing the rest of the time.

So, I don't know how significant is "I got an internship through this method" to prove that a method is good (but then again, maybe in the US culture it's actually something significant !)

I agree with you. My point, if it wans't clrear, is that I think correct naming is a prerequisite to finding design flaws in review ! Hence we have the same ultimate goal :-)

But seriously, naming things correctly makes understanding the global system so much easier.

The whole point of naming things is that you don't have to dive in this 60 LoC function, but rather can use its name to know what it does, and make a global mental model.

If you're not naming things correctly, you effectively make it almost impossible to review the design, and that's why people starts with asking about names.

Reviewing names is the exact opposite of picking local stuff. Names have no importance locally, but they have tremendous one globally.

So, please, use good names ^^

> If capital can be sold/transferred, capitalism (i.e. concentrated control of the means of production) will naturally recur

Please define "naturally", because I don't see anything natural to that. For me, it's a tautology to say that in a capitalist culture and education environment, capitalism will "naturally" occur. That doesn't convince me that the same human genetic pool (which I guess is the natural part ?) in another environment would behave the same way.

The title is

> French companies benefiting from state aid can't buy back shares

You stated "That's a false statement"

However it is in fact a true statement, since a law is effectively passed to forbid the very thing the post title describes.

Hence stating "That's a false statement" is "strictly false", and quoting a part of an article that explains that the exact thing you're quoting is now outdated doesn't make it less false somehow.

If you want to mean that companies "can" still buy back shares, although it's now illegal, well, that's just refusing to give the post title an honest interpretation of what it means.

That's strictly false.

The article clearly states that _initially_ companies were called to moderation, and that _now_ a law project will be passed to strictly forbids this.

"Le président de la République Emmanuel Macron a franchi un cap, vendredi matin, lors d’une rencontre téléphonique avec les partenaires sociaux, en annonçant que M. Le Maire soumettrait au premier ministre Edouard Philippe un projet pour encadrer strictement le versement des dividendes. Ils devront être suspendus quand les sociétés bénéficient des reports d’échéances fiscales et sociales"

Let's face it,none of those are compelling reasons for more latency when at the same time the computing power available has ballooned to its current level. Adding auto-complete given processors litterally orders of magnitude faster should have been feasible without getting slower.

Because the next step when you face this problem is doing a search-replace of the quotes to remove them. ASCII quotes are on your keyboard, so you can actually type the command to remove them.

Unicode quotes probably aren't, so it's extra annoying to remove them, and they're not even the same character for start and end so you have to do it twice.

The time spent for removal is then vastly higher than with ASCII quotes, which in the context of unwanted characters may well qualify as "horrid" imo.

No it doesn't, since O(n*log(n)) is in P too. P = NP doesn't imply that the complexity of finding the solution has the exact same complexity than verifying it, just that both are polynomial.

The first thing twitter proposes when you create an account : "Do you want to match emails and phone numbers to account".

In this thread : "How can it be possible to match emails and phone numbers to accounts?"

It's not a loophole, it's a feature.

It's in the TOS before you sign up : "Twitter also uses your contact information to market to you as your country’s laws allow, and to help others find your account if your settings permit, including through third-party services and client applications."

How can someone then not realize this is a possibility ? At what moment can someone start to even begin to think twitter is a safe place for endangered people ? It's an ad company, what do you expect really ?

Except that for a lot of developers, "the right thing" has nothing to do with what customers want, but rather with language used, libraries used, CI/CD setup, monitoring active... So many technical aspects that sometimes have nothing to do with the customer wants. And that's where being aligned makes sense.

I think it's survivor bias.

Most old desktop software is happily deleted in favor of newer versions because it's full of bugs and/or almost impossible to use, and the one that is not is the actually not too buggy one.

On certain use cases, you can use a pool of objects, creating long lived objects drawn and return to a pool, reusing the memory efficiently with minimal overhead. Of course, you need to be able to size such a pool to begin with.

Disclaimer : I have no experience with game development whatsoever !

UUID don't "collide", they're just the same, or not.

They're not generated from any business relevant input, there is nothing to "confuse" in the first place, and the whole concept of uuid "colliding" doesn't make sense.