cosinetau

There are a lot in Abromowitz and Stegun handbook, last section "Index of Notation". It's not quite what you're asking for, but it's fairly authoritative.

There are free software projects attempting to solve the same problem in another corner of the ag industry

https://openthc.org

A week or two ago, in a post about books on leadership, someone posted about the US Army's ADRP 6-22 Army Leadership handbook, which I started reading. https://www.benning.army.mil/mssp/PDF/adrp6_22_new.pdf

Apparently, they keep track of terminology they deprecate in former revisions of the handbook. "Critical Thinking" being one of them as it is "No longer a formally defined term." (Page vi)

So, what does "Critical Thinking" mean to you?

I think your most right about the feeling towards the posting. Many folks find some reason to disqualify themselves before they even apply.

Normally, I've heard others reference books like A&S as a "handbook."

It's even in the formal title.

I think the difference is that the prompt you describe still travels over the wire to get to your device, while this new thing used Bluetooth based on FIDO standards.

So the access key the client logging in passes to the server is from the local device you trust.

I feel that I'm reading that tone in Linus's post, too. But after reading these comments, it also appears that some people simply have different use cases for these tools aside from stepping through logic.

And in other cases, the debugging statements have to be present in the code to even get to step through the program, and their concerns revolve around code management when tools that have code inserts like that.

But it would be nicer if they wrote their stuff like their use cases weren't the only ones, or the most important. What features have we lost because they couldn't think past themselves?

That's rough, but remember, democracy isn't always convenient.

They will definitely want to consider extraordinary projects, materials, and infrastructure as munitions.

But they also have existing, good relationships with academics in other engineering fields where those regulated materials can still be accessed.

Maybe Wide-Open Source isn't the right answer for all projects because of the understood risks, but because they already have a good set of SOP for a similar program, perhaps it's time to ask them if they could expand that program's scope and loosen their grip on those things a little.

Hi Cray, please see https://news.ycombinator.com/formatdoc

It is very hard to read your submission, which includes "strong written communication skills." Happy New Year!

Not to mention how expensive that flow chart looks.

Right, but, you'll tell a new customer you will have the product ready for them quickly, but because you didn't have a stakeholder that would, you're running the risk trying to sell them a product that wouldn't solve their particular problem (feature mismatch).

Maybe if you believe the limits of technology would be a blocker to solving your customer's vision of their problem, then a prototype before you have a stakeholder that would compensate you somehow is probably the right answer.

But I think you can easily confuse the business objectives with engineering objectives in making the assumption that the prototypical solution is representative of the customer's vision of the solution.

It's not that I think you or a business can't live with that dissonance, I think it may open you up to that problem.

I'm sorry, I'm in the PNW. I think I just got caught in my own damn bubble.

I feel you're right, which is why I'm surprised by the seemingly negative response to this news, and the overwhelmingly positive response from GitHub+Microsoft.

Some of the same conflicts of interest exist in both modern cases, notwithstanding, both have opposite contribution histories.

Am I missing something?

I really need an open source composition of preexisting technologies that this product is trying to solve.

I did. Thank you! Can I have another?

Happy 20th, Google!

20 is an interesting time of life for any legal entity. I hope you renew your vision of "don't be evil" for your next 20!

With love, me

> guns blazing

Yeah, but what good would it have done? The privacy battle they're fighting with Facebook and social was lost a long time ago.

Aren't there testing frameworks that were supposed to help solve this problem?

Maybe you could engage customers qualitatively, and translate that information into software requirements and acceptance tests? I'm not entirely clear how you want to engage these kinds of users.

They already support parental leave by supporting ICE.

What is game journalism doing right [if anything] that tech journalism can borrow or learn from?

You could go to entrepreneur meetups nearby and try to feel out other people with experience in government sales and affairs.

There's a great one in Seattle called Seattle Startup Open Coffee.

That's the trouble with cultural axioms.

Standard etiquette might just be empathy. If you have ever felt annoyed by audio you could not control, then you should strongly consider a quiet keyboard for your office.

That tweet is taking a beating.

Maybe its when they realize that in order to continue to grab deeper market share they need to optimize how their business is impacted by consumer's access to credit?

The problem seems to fit because younger companies' concerns are about how their business is impacted according to consumers access to their product. Apple is almost everywhere here in the states. What else could be preventing other consumers/holdouts from accessing Apple's premier products?

Thank you, O great Wikipedia hacker!

It would be interesting to see how this mandate will work in the US with GDPR in Europe.

That would be a very aggressive response from ICANN, though it might work from an arms race perspective.

I don't think cold war era thinking alone is the solution to these issues; there are likely other, less destructive, paths.

Oyez is a national treasure.