algesten

Given the reputation of this company, I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear this change at some point in the future.

Uber has different situations in different places, but to me it seems that they only have real competition in some cities in the US.

https://github.com/torvalds/linux

Linus just don't agree with GitHub's pull-requests, so he doesn't accept such that way.

But then SS7 is probably neither here nor there, since getting a new SIM with someone else's mobile number is likely to be way easier (and require less tech knowledge).

Go into your mobile network shop, ask to replace your faulty SIM, make up some sob story why didn't bring your ID. Did they say NO? Try the next shop.

Also the security around the terminals they use to switch SIMs in those shops are often very lax. Just last month I saw an example of both account sharing AND leaving the terminal unlocked with me next to it.

I've yet to work on a project that handles XML where we have a XSD prevalidation step that makes the reading of some deeply nested XML tag feel safe.

Unless we count XML <-> data object binding back in the java days. Not sure that felt any better...

first that came up when searching for it.

I felt morally OK with the situation...

Only, my contract did have a noncompete. But then, this is Sweden, and noncompete clauses are almost not enforceable by Swedish law. An employer can't stop an employee to take another position. To be a valid clause, an employer must offer the same payment the new position would have had whilst riding out the non-work period, and no one does that.

A strongly worded letter from my lawyer sorted it. Never heard from them again.

I think we talk about the same thing, sometimes I will test something internal.

I've thought about what I'm doing as considering larger "units" in my unit testing, but perhaps "functional testing" as parent introduced is what I'm advocating. I see this as distinct from integration testing. In a micro service architecture, my integration test would be chaining multiple services together into test scenarios.

Throughout my career I find tests that tests the very lowest implementation detail, like private helper methods, and even though a project can achieve 100% coverage it still is no help avoiding bugs or regression.

Given a micro service architecture I now advocate treating each service as a black box and focus on writing tests for the boundaries of that box.

That way tests actually assist with refactoring rather than be something that just exactly follows the code and breaks whenever a minor internal detail changes.

However occasionally I do find it helpful map out all input/output for an internal function to cover all edge cases. But that's an exception.

However, in my experience, the IT industry is overflowing with pointless process meetings initiated by middle management.

My point was more to give a concrete example on how some (dev driven) initiative can give productive results which was sort of in line with the OP article.

1) We do need better awareness of what others around us are doing, especially across the dev/ops divide. 2) Communication, kanban is there to show interested non-devs how projects are progressing.

We update the kanban before the meeting and let one person per day read through the entire board for today/ongoing/blocked. If there are any tasks that person doesn't understand – this is the time to ask.

The process takes often less than 10 mins per day.

Any issues raised will be discussed in loosely formed groups afterwards to not waste everyone's time.

I think what I learned is that you mustn't let process be shoved on you by middle management. Take control to make these things productive for you.

https://nmap.org

Obviously that is Google's problem, but I haven't seen Google (nor Atlassian in this case) claim anyone else is to blame.

The problem is absolutely owned by Atlassian, but they actually did do something to fix it.

I don't believe anyone (apart from maybe Daniel J Bernstein) can claim any piece of software is bug/hole free, and neither does anyone need to!

On a tangent to this. I noticed that one benefit my company reaped from embracing a micro service architecture was that we get away with _a lot_ of shit code.

Suddenly a NodeJS process can have glaring memory leaks and work fine for weeks because whenever it crashes, it restarts in 0.5 second and no one even bothered to investigate.

Compare that with the good-ol-JBoss monolith with a 3-4 minute startup time.

On the one hand, crap code can go unnoticed for weeks, which feels wrong and probably will bite us somewhere in the end, on the other hand, we can focus on function not code quality.

I don't want nitpick, but isn't there a _world_ of difference between ARC and your standard GC? In a GC I expect various different "spaces" for different generations of memory allocation and an assortment of algorithms for detecting unreferenced memory at various times. "Stop the world" events etc.

I may be wrong, but I always thought of ARC as a somewhat glorified pointer structure where each allocated memory got a counter of how many places are currently pointing to it, and when that counter reaches 0, deallocation happens. No fancy generation spaces, no complicated cycle finding algorithms and no stopping the world.

At the time, the M$ acronym was IMO well earned. These days it appears to be different. Microsoft still has a large dominance on the desktop, but appears to not be playing quite as hard ball anymore. Stuff like NodeJS on Azure and VSCode would simply not have happened in the early 2000. Whether they actually changed, time will tell.

As for other companies deserving a derogatory acronym, I think you can measure these companies with:

1) How much do they actually subvert/interfere with standards and other companies inventions to gain/maintain their market dominance?

2) Do they at all innovate to deserve their market position and/or give back?

Without much analysis, I think Adobe may actually deserve an Adob$. Here you have a company that still almost every year change their proprietary binary formats (.PSD, .AI, etc) forcing an entire creative industry to spend a lot on software that have largely not had any significant innovation for the last 10-15 years (the functions in Photoshop/Illustrator have more or less remained the same).

And it is the same lock-in as Microsoft Office has/had, because even if you decide to operate your creative business using only alternative software, your clients and suppliers won't.

http://arngren.net

If it was only about avoiding suffering/pain and not the dying, would you be okay with farming children for eating?

They will live happy lives pampered and cared for, running around in the backyard until you press a button and child drops dead. Takes 1 microsecond to die.

It's obviously absurd, but you're making that decision with the animals you eat all the time. A chicken (probably) is less self aware than a cow, but we do eat cows.

But how do you decide that another being is un-self-aware enough to be eaten?

Which takes me back to the absurd. If human meat was tasty (I read it isn't), would someone with downs syndrome be morally ok to eat? How about someone in a vegetative state?

If the sliding scale of self awareness is the deciding factor, we might as well eat less aware humans.

I use coffeescript classes as components without any problem and that inserts an "extends" function into every compiled .js-file that has a class.

I suspect people that need ES5/ES6 compatibility that currently rely on React.createClass as a peer dependency can switch to maintaining their own createClass function local to the project. Suboptimal, but not a lot of code.

Email only works _because_ of big players like GMail. Running your own server spam free and away from black lists is an endless task.

DNS is going a similar way with more and more ISPs resorting to hijacking DNS lookups for all sorts of nefarious reasons. This protocol seriously need a broadly embraced signature system to validate origin.

Second one has a "Cher moment" almost straight away, just after "wandering the desert a thousand days" the following "mmmm" has a glissando between two notes where we clearly hear the hard edge on what I assume is an auto tune lookahead. I don't actually know how they work, I just assume there's a lookahead for the next note approximation which makes glissandos sound funny. https://youtu.be/M8uPvX2te0I?t=31s

The last one I can't really fault for too much autotune, more a lack of it. The bridge is especially intense https://youtu.be/E0oyglKjbFQ?t=1m51s

In music are you allowed to use amplifiers and speakers? They can add a lot of color and distortion. How about reverb? Rooms that aren't there. EQ to remove unwanted frequencies? Synthesizers? Digital effects? At what point is it not authentic anymore?

Same for photography. Are you allowed to touch the aperture? ISO? Shutter speed? Flash? Digital camera? At what point is it not authentic?