jj4211 @ jj4211 @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

1,766

Joined

2 yr. ago

Anyone in the line of succession that is disqualified to hold the office is skipped. Again according to the rules that the GOP might just ignore without consequence, but I don't think they like Musk enough to bother.

That's like 2 or 3 fentanyl pills, if I understand Bondi right...

Always_has_been.jpg

Notably, Phenylephrine was approved in pill form for decongestion, and is all over the place... but doesn't do a damn thing. Trying to keep pseudoephedrine limited in the market to try to fight meth.

Some fare better than others. But anyone in the 70s to 80s is at such a higher risk of some event that takes them out of commission than usual and we have over 60 million people to look at, surely we don't have to settle for people that have a risk of disrupting the office.

I think it's not so much about going after the China market, but about cheaper approach to going after the worldwide market (except US). Going through US means taking huge hit on import tariffs on material and the pissing contest causes a lot of retaliatory tariffs further making things rough on the way into other countries. Since it keeps on changing, impossible to realistically plan around.

So the US market suffers as jobs exit and prices go up, but the prices were going to go up either way. The world except US is more preserved.

Also, to the extent that they could compete with China, this certainly wouldn't hurt.

I don't see anywhere where I said that...

Wow, my local Waffle House has got some fierce competition here.

Why do you seem convinced I can't possibly be a software developer? Evidently your development career has given you one experience with a company that takes the task with a great deal of seriousness and I've seen that happen, but a lot of companies are not so diligent and either try to game things best they can either with like two people making git commits or an army of offshore developers that seem to quit within 6 months leaving little competency and plenty of opportunity for a bad actor to get in the door.

I do this not because it is easy, but because I am hard.

It is still valid to point out that "north of Antartica" is a silly phrase in context, even though it's fine given the more specific Weddell Sea information. If you did want to help readers know the story based on a more well-known landmark, a less silly phrase would have been simply been "Weddell Sea, near Antarctica".

By relative volume of the known things. It's not a guarantee, but it's highly suggestive that the more observable instances of something, the more not yet observed instances of the same thing are out there.

There are factors that can knock that out of balance, like not having access to source code making things harder to find, but those confounding factors would hide more on the closed source side than the open source side.

Probably not. 15 years is not that long, what do I know, I’m just on senior expert level.

Longevity is not a guarantee of broad exposure. It may mean you have deep exposure, but making the rounds around the industry I can't imagine maintaining such a universally optimistic picture of commercial management of software development.

Companies run skeleton crews on crap products that don’t make money.

Companies run skeleton crews on products when they think they can get away with it. Very high profile commercial projects with a lot of analyst attention may not be able to get away with it, but some surprisingly high profile projects without quite as much scrutiny get away with more than you would guess.

This is where your lack of knowledge about products like that shines through.

I'm speaking from familiarity with the provider side of things, wondering when a customer will catch on that they can't seem to get that awesome support unless it's the same guy as their peers get, and suspiciously unable to get decent support for a random week in June or something.

From what you are writing you aren’t a programmer and you haven’t worked in a software corporation before

Incorrect assumption on both counts. A few companies across a couple of decades and two of those companies extensively engaging with other companies on projects to get me some exposure to closed source development organizations even at some other companies.

It does not state that Marty only ate 4/6 of his pizza. Nor that he ate only of his own pizza. It defined a minimum pizza consumption threshold for Marty without further details.

Or the kid just understands the given scenario and prioritized coming up with a valid answer instead of assuming the question is bad. You don't have to be ND to be thoughtful/observant or to be surprised that the question expected to be called out as wrong that early.

On the handwriting, it could be that, or it could be typical elementary school handwriting. Or someone imitating elementary school writing for internet points in a fake math question.

People have already commented on fractions, there's a lot of math that is way easier to keep accurate by leaving in fractional form as it goes.

For word problems, done correctly, the math is pointless if you can't map it to more realistic scenarios. In terms of applying math to the real world, it's supremely rare that the world just spits out the equation ready for you to solve, the ability to distill a scenario described by prose to a mathemetical solution is critical. Problem is when they are handled incorrectly and have ambiguous solutions or parameters, but dealing with kids' homework, this is pretty rare, though it's admittedly utterly infuriating when it comes up.

But could he draw red sides with blue ink?

Maybe it's not smaller, just farther away?

If OpenSSL was for-profit, it would be a corporate project with dozens if not hundreds of developers

It seems like you don't have a very broad exposure to closed source development. Corporations frequently have a skeleton crew working on a component or entire project. You might notice if you get escalated to development enough that it's always like the same guy or two. It's because they might only have a couple of guys working on it. Some companies will spend more on measures to obfuscate that reality than they would spend on actually developing. Certainly some corp closed source projects are that big, but so too are many open source projects.

Hell I've dealt with financial institutions using proprietary software that was abandoned by their vendor 15 years prior (came up because the software no longer worked with new stuff, and the institutions demanded wrapper software for new stuff to imitate the old stuff enough to keep using the unmaintained, unpatched, zero developer project).

I also don't think companies are holding the proprietary vendors to quite the standard you imagine, certainly not automatically. By the same logic you propose for open source "someone else must have done it", you also have that for big companies, if not more so. "Surely they have good security practices" or "it's so popular someone must have done that".

Well, at least Nissan and Mitsubishi aren't doing exactly great.

I find Stellantis utterly confounding how they still exist as they are. So much mismanagement and yet somehow still alive.

Or even a PR step