sunk1st

the headline raises important questions that we aren’t guaranteed an answer for in the article; what did revenue start at? and how much additional debt (of any kind) was incurred on the way to $20M revenue?

Thanks for your response. It’s an interesting perspective. From my point of view the idea of having incompatible boot protocols is a feature, not a bug. Fundamental differences must exist at some point in the hierarchy. Why not the boot mechanism?

We only know that “buyer hooked it up to his computer and said [something]” - how does that strengthen an argument for (or against) right to repair, exactly?

The allegation is that both FedEx and Holman were involved, yes. If FedEx can produce an audit trail showing that the vehicles left FedEx facilities with true odometers then I don’t think Holman stands a chance.

If the replacement process is controlled (in the technical sense of the word) then yeah, you have room to make the case that your title should not have an asterisk next to it saying the true mileage is unknown.

If all sales were brokered by the same 3rd party then it doesn’t help us determine culpability.

A close reading of the article leaves room to doubt whether FedEx was complicit in the alleged scheme. I’m not surprised to see that FedEx denies the allegations. Given that there is another defendant in the lawsuit I suspect there is more to this story than what’s been presented here.

What’s the DPC’s argument against?

What options are at the EU’s disposal to fix the issue?

There’s a direct logical connection. The mechanism is easily abused. Mark everything as confidential and what happens? The headline becomes true. Why? Because criticism will necessarily require leaking confidential information.

This particular headline makes an honest appeal to your emotions.

Interesting. Do you have a citation for that?

Without any links to references this comment has no weight.

Please expand on “devicetrees [prevent]… generalized kernels from existing,“ if you don’t mind.

As I understood it from context, the word lazy was being used to complain that the reference to Spanner wasn’t in-lined.

you grinding leetcode is how they built this in the first place

That’s an interesting perspective. However, I maintain my position. Banning criticism of people is too general an abstraction and opens the door to bad actors. An article posted today (“I don’t need your query language”) offers a good concrete example.

In an environment where I am unable to criticize a person’s approach (and by extension, that person) I and the rest of the team are at the mercy of their idiosyncrasies (I am referring to the syntax issues highlighted in the first example of the mentioned article).

Escalation via managers can work in specific situations but it has no guarantee of success and comes at a significant cost. In the best case it exists as an extra layer of indirection that must be paid for.

A technical solution, which is what you are proposing, is a poor solution when a better structured policy obviates the need for it.

Humans are the batteries in the matrix.

A policy that only allows criticism of ideas is a poor policy. Criticizing the ideas of a person who consistently generates poor ideas doesn’t help that person to generate better ideas. That person’s idea generating process (and by extension, that person) is what must be criticized constructively. To do otherwise is to open the door to bad actors.

Sorry that it took me so long to respond. I was wrong to over generalize to the EU. My personal experience is with countries around the Mediterranean and I maintain that while it may be available it’s not taken advantage of the way it is in the US.

“`os` is bad, don’t use it.” Ok, but why? What’s wrong with it?

Preventative dental care in the US is a thing. Have you lived in Europe? It’s not really a thing in the EU.

It makes sense that in another language you might not phrase things this way. But in English we do.

what’s plymouth?

The rule is the rule because that’s what make sense phonetically. It’s why you would say “el agua” and “el hacha” in Spanish even though those articles don’t match the gender of those words.

When you bump your clock forward do you also bump your time stamp forward by the same amount?