This is a massive assumption from the story that was provided. We don't know that they didn't discuss with the team and an explanation of "I added a log to errors that were already happening" shouldn't result in lack of trust from the manager.
Reactive managers like that are a big problem in the industry.
Forking doesn't imply control. A forked version of chromium would still want to keep up to date with the upstream project.
You seem to view this public option with an unrealistic view of how software development works. Especially in the public sector.
Somebody comes in with a requirement to do something in the fastest and cheapest way possible. In this case, make a public browser option. The engineers go off and fork chromium and simply reskin it because that meets the brief. They might even go so far as to set up a CI pipeline that auto pulls new features from upstream.
The public sector isn't going to be interested in trying to make the optimal browser if they are forced to create one. They are going to be interested in meeting the brief in the fastest and easiest way possible.
This. For bg3 I started by looking up a simple question around class complexity. Landed on fighter for my first class and then only looked up specific questions I had about how something works if I wanted to consider it.
That was only to verify I understood what it was saying it did correctly.
I'll get even more specific to what is likely to happen in that scenario. The governmental entity will reskin chromium. Google will own the open source project.
Your arguments are all over the place. It's not the governments responsibility to ensure that a law suit is profitable.
And a new browser isn't going to do what you think it is. Any attempt by a government to create a browser is just going to use Blink anyways. The reason so many browsers are using it (including browsers made by tech giants) is that rendering engines are incredibly difficult to maintain. Especially as the Web continues to evolve.
I think you're struggling with the difference of convenience and difficulty. Doing things without the web implies you are going to do them in the same way you'd have to pre-web. That makes the web more convenient.
Internationalization isn't about the translation. It's about not hard coding the strings that display. Putting them somewhere that is easy to swap out would allow users to provide their own if they wanted.
I think an important factor is how the host treats the misinformation. If they push back on it, you know they aren't inviting those people due to agreement.
Real time with Bill Maher has people of all sorts of perspectives on but he usually actively debates against positions he disagrees with.
There's lots of valid criticism of the guy but he at least tries to his ability to present a fair argument.
If you don't feel like misinformation is being called out on that site then it may be questionable. Don't shy away from a content creator just for having questionable guests. Turn them off because you don't like how they handle those guests.
In principle, if a government is going to distribute content to the public, they also have a duty to equip the public to be able to consume the content. Telling people to come up with their own private sector tools to reach the public sector is a bit off.
This statement is a rearrangement of events. The governments of the world didn't create an online presence and then tell the private sector to create browsers. Governments joined in an already existing method of communication because it was convenient, popular, and browsers already existed to view the content.
The only red flags in a real relationship are how you treat the other person and yourself. Don't put dating on a pedestal. It's just 2 people hanging out and getting to know one another.
It's not the same for everybody. Some people find lots of success with apps. Others meet people at social events. Some meet at work. Just be yourself around people and pay attention to who you jive with on a personal level.
Weight shouldn't be a problem. The reality is that everybody has things they are attracted to and for some people weight can be a factor. Only loose weight for your own happiness, though. Don't do it to attract a partner because that's not a good way to maintain a lifestyle change and your own happiness is paramount with changes like that.
If he's getting to the first round of technical interviews then it's likely not a languages issue. That's the round that many companies put you in front of a mid-level dev who arrogantly asks you a code-kata question and refuses to answer questions. It may be that he's not inherently good at solving the toy box problems on the spot. That's the issue I tend to have in these rounds.
Though I guess it could be a languages issue if the mid level dev doesn't know the language you're doing the problem in and marks you down for that.
Considering they are getting through the whole trilogy I'm guessing it's probably more background noise during work or something.