bandushrew

total hospital bill: 0

The ideal approach would be to have packages of the "interesting" kind automatically diverted to a scanning location, and then continue on their way...

Dont think of it as them being interested in a single package. They are interested in setting up a mechanism by which ALL packages of interest can be diverted with only very small effort on their part.

Its insanely wasteful when you view it like that.

Setup a different system, and other motivations will drive their innovation, right?

Unless your claim is that innovation can only EVER be driven by profit?

Is that really true? whether the original declaration is strongly typed or not, its likely that changes to the type will result in code changes needed wherever the value is being used.

The only thing that no typings does is make it impossible for the compiler to help you find where it is being used.

We have 2 apple computers, and apple tv, 4 android tablets and three windows computers, 1 iphone, 2 android phones.

I dont think any of my friends are apple-only, even those who love apple.

Is an apple-only household really that common?

Im not a fan of copyright, but this is one case where having an official source of truth is pure good for everyone.

Just let them be the source of truth for documentation about the SDK. Honestly, its best for everyone concerned.

Its true you have worked hard all your life, and overcome many obstacles.

Its also true that many people do all of that, and are still unable to attain the lifestyle you have (whatever it may be).

You have worked hard and overcome many obstacles and been very lucky.

That is pretty cool.

Is there any actual evidence that these youtube videos are in fact driving people to commit acts of terrorism?

I kept wondering whether I was missing something.

I think maybe I had an epiphany just now, the last couple of sentences where the OP spoke about maintaining a clean project history suddenly made things click.

Personally, I don't want that, on the very occasional time I go into the git history what I am looking for is code history.....the story of how a piece of code arrived at its current implementation....that means I need all the commits, the "fixing a typo" commits, the "oops, overlooked a logic error" commits...

I don't want to see the history of the project when I look at git history, I want to see the history of the code.

Its messy, but it tells me so much. I can see how this piece of code arrived at its current state, who worked on it, and what they did.

The idea of git history as a way of tracking the project history just never occurred to me. Now I understand it, I definitely don't want it, but its nice to have a mystery cleared up.

You don't need to know the entire project, but you had damn well better understand the code right in front of you that you are editing.

In literally any language, developers who don't understand what they are changing will cause bugs.

My "real" presence is empty of anything except professional presence. LinkedIn, github etc etc. My "real" presence never engages, never debates and is effectively not there except when it engages with the real world via resumes etc.

My actual presence is scattered across the internet in multiple pseudonymous social networks and eagerly discusses topics I am passionate about.

It occasionally attracts harassment etc, but I dont care cause they cannot reach out into my real life and actually harm me.

But it is very effective as a way of spotting certain kinds of bugs, while at the same time gaining a much deeper understanding of a codebase.

Reading code in a non trivial way is a very special skill that not many developers have, but that is very worthwhile to attain.

Whenever I come to a new codebase, I start by grabbing a pretty random bug and reading the code in that area. just flicking through, forcing myself to ask questions about it and finding out the answers.

actively engaging with code like that is an amazingly effective way of absorbing a codebase.

the choices are: buy a desktop OS that sucks immensely from from a vendor who sucks, or pay a mere 40% extra.

feels cheap to me.

I prefer to commit discrete change sets (not features, or stories, just a discrete set of changes that achieve a piece of what I am wanting, dont break the code base and dont break the build).

I have heard that phrase, I live by it and encourage others to do the same. it is especially important when working as a part of a bigger team on the same area of the code.

Teams that commit early and often are happy teams :)

OTOH I use stash constantly, multiple times every day, when switching between branches, because sometimes its just handy to be able to put stuff aside to look at something else.

I dont recall ever losing code because of it, but it is certainly possible and its not hard to see how it could happen.

I decide whether to commit what I have done or whether to stash it for now, based on what state it is in.

If I am still in the exploratory stage of the work, I usually wont commit, I will just stash and come back to it later.

Its a useful thing to be able to do at time when i am not yet ready to COMMIT to the changes I have made.

She had no idea how to bathe a baby safely, how to dress it, safely, how to hold it safely, how to play with it safely, how to clean its bum, how to put on a nappy, how to bottle feed it, how to breast feed it ....the list of things she didn't know was endless....

Neither did I.

We figured it out through a combination of trial and error ("oops, wet babies are slippery and easy to drop") parental advice and phamplets.

its not rocket science, its not easy and the "average" girl has NO insider information.

citation needed.

There are a bunch of compounds whose effects are so harmful that a few parts per million are potentially lethal.

The fact you apparently are unaware of any of them, speaks volumes.

Ballmer was right. He underestimated the amount of money they would make, and also underestimated the size of the various markets, and ALSO got it wrong about who would be the "other" OS but......his core point was correct.

Pick out the "true" syrians. Ethnicity is not a good predictor of appearance.

Lets take Islamic Terrorists as an example, they have a very wide pool of people to choose from, many of whom do not fit any stereotype you could come up with.

As soon as its known that security targets specific profiles, it becomes trivial to bypass security.

Given two cake makers in town, if one is happy to provide cakes to gays, and the other is not, in general the town will provide custom to the shop whose stance they agree with.

By passing a law that forces both shops to behave the same way, the opportunity for social pressure to be applied is reduced.

If not eating sugar could slow (all) cancers, then not eating at all would clearly cover that case, and should have slowed the lung cancer.

At the very least, his anecdote is convincing to me that it "starving the cancer" doesn't work with lung cancer.

In the more general sense though my first impression of the phrase "route energy through metabolic pathways that cancer is disadvantaged for" is that it sounds like random word salad.