389 karma · joined October 22, 2019
This was also not the first time HSBC was caught doing this.
Nothing has changed. They made the losses back. I know execs calculate fines as operational expenses because I've helped them do it (granted not HSBC but people aren't too disimilar from each other)
For the average Joe maybe.
For corporates? What a joke. I work in fintech systems for ForEx and credit lending. Gets abused by banks allllll the time. And I don't mean some sketchy african or asian bank. I mean HSBC. They still trade, despite the billions in fraudulent transactions they've knowingly moved.
And HSBC are just retarded, I promise you ALL the large banks have moved fraudulent transactions. Not always intentionally, but banks consist of people and people are easily swayed with the right pressure points.
Does crypto make this easier to do? Yes, but the problem isn't the medium of value transfer. That's as untrue of crypto as it is of fiat.
This is a great write up about community building on asynchronous, public forums vs private, synchronous chat.
I notice IRC avoided a mention here though, but it suffers the same problems as discord (namely not being searchable)
Whatever argument you have about why this is a good thing is utterly lacking in substance, because the US has a defacto ID and it's horrendously bad (talking about that SSN).
Just issue a proper ID system for goodness sake, what a stupid set of problems to have in the modern era :/
You as an employee are not entitled to equity at all. That's incentive, not required.
And equity isn't a great offer either. How many startups REGULARLY fail before they even get out the door?
For everyone talking about how much money they made off of equity options, we can find plenty more that lost out on a chunk of their monthly salary.
I'm not saying don't take equity, but let's be honest: Identifying if a company has the potential for their equity share to outweigh the lost salary requires skills and knowledge most of us don't have.
Which is not to say Google and Apple don't care about their employees, clearly this article suggests otherwise.
It's just not true that pulling out is a viable or even straight forward option.
You could also make an argument for US government placing pressure on these companies to keep a presence in Russia so they (the US government) can have some kind of foothold to push soft pressure
> likely result in many other western IT firms closing their offices and leaving
That's just naive. Russia and China are huge markets. Apple and Google are not going anywhere unless their hands are forced.
That doesn't seem right. There are plenty of languages that are born from platforms, but I'm skeptical that its anywhere near the majority. Some platformless examples from the top of my head
- Java
- Rust
- Python
- C++
- Go
- Lua
In my opinion: C is not popular because of Unix. Unix is popular because it's written in C. The same is arguably true of Kubernetes. Neither docker nor k8s drove mainstream adoption of Go. Go did that with it's own properties, the same is true of Rust and C etc.
> Functional programming is less popular because no major successful platform has adopted a functional language as the preferred language.
The question here though is why?
The author argues because FP is unwieldy for the general software case (which I assume is enterprise CRUD apps). And I have to agree: State management is a huge part of CRUD apps.
------
EDIT: I am not presuming K8s is popular because of Go. The argument here is the success of the platform and choice of language are related, not directly consequential. K8s could have been written in rust and would probably be as popular because of its feature set
BlackBerry was not that massive a shift from the standard. It was just _slightly_ different to what feature phones of the day were doing. Sony Ericson had some P800/P900 devices that clouted the BB in terms of power and feature sets. Here's a quick roundup of why I don't hold BB in high regard
1. BBM was not unique or innovative. Many a chat app had existed on J2ME devices LONG before RIM were a thing.
2. BB launched apps from a Main method, making architectural changes all but impossible going forward. This also lead to that goddamned spinning hour glass that needed a device restart to resolve.
3. Not many claims about their security and compression turned out to be true. Whilst the encryption was excellent, handing over the keys to various governments was not. The compression I remain unconvinced about, many a conflicting report out there.
4. Ultimately RIM were unable to execute on the BB platform in a meaningful manner. They were very quickly outclassed by Google and Apple despite an incredible market lead. Looking back, blackberry always felt like a polished proof of concept but not quite production grade. Even low level Android devices had a more polished feel. Touchscreen became popular for a reason, BB pretty much refused to believe it was more than a fad. Then they made the Torch, and they deserved to die at that point. I loathed how useless and unpredictable that phone was at being a phone.
5. This one is subjective: Those keyboards were utter garbage. I could do 60 wpm on a t9, and that was slower than most people I knew. None of those people could match their speeds on a BB. Today's touchscreen keyboards are worse, so point there.
I don't miss my blackberry, but I do miss BBM and that time of my life.
I do miss some of my old feature phones though, such as the Samsung D600 and the Motorola V3 Razer
As an African that's an easy answer. They stole it.
Before you all go clutching your pearls: it's beyond impractical to even suggest paying it back nor would I even want to think about that. Not an option. not suggesting it.
But don't pretend it's because you're special. You stole it. Just own it.
Strange addition, a little defensive there BBC? Something something coal miners and programming
Why have we all so strongly coupled our identities as programmers to the language we use? Sense of community and a perceived need to defend it?
I don't think Go needs generics, but I'm not about to invent obscure edge cases to justify for/against the idea. That's a recurring theme in all defenses of any language. It's not helpful.
Use Go if you like the "clarity", stay away from it if you don't like the "verbosity".
These are both valid points, but they're subjective. Pushing it as fact is dishonest and self-serving, as well as eventually detrimental.
Is it really such a mystery?
Mostly every religion prohibits sexual freedom and most every government has deeply religious members in the legislature. There is no separation of the church's morals and political ones.
Which means yes, I'm suggesting a ban on religion in the political space. I don't mean you can't be a politician if you're religious, I mean you should be fired if you ever fall back on religious grounds while executing your responsibility.
Strange how the more religious the political leadership, the less freedoms you find in that society, regardless of religion (and like all generalisations, there are plenty of exceptions to that sweeping statement).
This is really not meant as an assault on religion, but let's not pretend that Church is not a political institution. You can have a legislative and judicial political leadership, or a religious one.
But I don't believe it's possible to have both (and call yourself a free country)
I just wish there'd be some more love on architect.
But maybe I need to learn more about the default installer, I couldn't get it to run on LVM and/or LUKS
I've used both Manjaro and Arch and Manjaro is far away my favorite distribution, because (to me at least) it's Arch for the lazy.
I ran Arch for years before Manjaro and so maybe that's the reason, but I don't believe Manjaro abstracts you away from nuts and bolts layer as much as Ubuntu does?
INB4 the ubuntu comment: I know, I know. You can still do a lot of fiddling under the hood, it's just not in a manner i'd describe as "the linux way". There are a lot of helper layers that break if you try to subvert them, but i will admit that update-alternatives is the only example coming to mind now
It's easy to blame management because developers and engineers haven't the foggiest idea what management actually does.
Instead of engaging with that problem, they retreat to themselves where they hiss the name management in dark corners.
Fact is: Developers are incapable of self organising, and would drown overnight without management's stiff hand.
I absolutely hate how accurate that is because I always thought I was a big boy and I wouldn't need management if I just had "1 good tech idea".
Docker had the philosophy.
Now they are dying after losing the container wars. That's what happens when you have no idea what a product actually is...
>but insist to intercept every decision
Yes, because left to our own devices, developers will not contribute meaningful business value.
There is a better way, evidently it's not agile, but it needs management's buy in, because well they're in charge (get over it in all honestly, none of us actually want the job, trust me).
WE as engineers need to find a better way to engage management.
But those of you who just grumble "management ruin everything" deserve the pain that such a divide causes and we need to stop wasting lifeboat's on that mentality please
"But you can't steal an idea"
The world was built by good ideas and bad implementation, so I guess we are gonna disagree here.
However, if you were so inclined to believe otherwise, please explain to me how that spirit of open source would not have simply dictated that either the project get rebuilt from scratch or simply cloned before inclusion?
It's not hard to recognise the human problem and try to work with that. Instead: We find braindead allegiance and arrogance throwing shit on either side of the fence.
The open source community is in trouble if this is the direction we're moving in
Because the federal courts already ruled that APIs are eligible for copyright [0].
Google wanted to overturn the ruling that they were in violation of copyright and argued they used Java's APIs fairly under copyright law.
The court will not answer questions not put to it, and Google (I presume) felt they had a better shot at getting the court to agree it was fair usage, rather than arguing copyright should not apply here.
0: https://www.paleudislaw.com/federal-circuit-rules-that-apis-...
Don't use the browser?
I understand the temptation to use the browser, but this is the price you pay for using someone else's platform: They're free to close whatever door they want.
HTML renderers are dime a dozen. Electron is a thing. Serve the HTML using _another_renderer.
JavaFX isn't bad either but I'm not gonna sell anyone on that front because I don't even do it, but the option is there.
Please stop using my browser in obscure and painful ways just so you can (understandably) avoid having to write a native UI.
My previous company had a mix of docker and non-docker environments. We still had a CI/CD pipeline. SCP'ing a single binary still counts as an automated deploy pipe, not sure what that has to do with anything.
Also: Go is only truly statically compiled if you turn CGO off. Otherwise it's relying on system libs, which means you might be surprised if you upgrade a server and forget the other. I've been there :)
The US is one of the largest contributors of CO2 in the world. The per capita argument is silly: They're a single, centralised source of pollution. Just regulate it already. The impact would be phenomenal.
As for the poorer countries: How about the wealthier nations that outright stole the mineral resources from us start paying that money back in the form of a solution rather than having their denizens pointing obese fingers at us?
I'm not saying give the money back (would be nice though), but how about spending that ill-gotten gain on progress for a change?
1. It's inaccurate. And that's not just "technically true", it's very rare that the test reproduces results.
2. Jung's theories (the ones used in the test) aren't just "controversial". They're wrong. He says it himself, in the same document they used to create the test.
It is just a cash cow now.
The _biggest_ problem with the test is it is harmful, not helpful. People believe the results are accurate _and permanent_ and so division is created where in reality there is more overlap than difference.
It's also not good to tell people "these are good" followed up by "you have none of them and never will".
By the way: This is true of a _lot_ of IQ tests too: We're still debating what IQ is, nevermind how to measure it. So we definitely shouldn't be telling people the results of their IQ tests, most of which are also not reproducible.
But the data these tests collect is useful. We just shouldn't wield such aouthority about a theory with a lot of apparent leaks we can't explain. There's a better way
Psychology is a young field. Lots of kinks to work out still
and it's also just for depedencies it downloads.
_your_ code lives where you put it
either
- he was born to the wrong era
- he didn't spend the time to create the demand for the ideas he peddled
In any event: If you want to post something about how "he's not that smart": the problem is actually you. The dude's a legend, is incredibly bright, but can't articulate that well.
But please, by all means waste your bandwidth being angry at an old man rationalising the long list of life decisions they have behind them
So I guess they're trying to pop up as many endpoints as possible to circumvent that.
I don't know the details about the network block though, so I might be mistaken. But the nginx config in that repo is purely a TLS proxy. Nothing magical happening there at all, just an entrance node to the main signal network
The TLS proxy is not sufficient. Marlinspike addressed this in their incredibly childish PR [0]:
>As we said in the blog post, it is nothing more than a simple TLS proxy as an interim solution to help people while we're working on something more scalable and more robust
I'm not so sure they made it clear they were working on another solution in that blog post [1], but it's a known problem that proxies can be fingered. I don't see the value add here and I can't read this as anything other than "boo hoo, we weren't listened to" (which is not surprising, given their behavior)
[0]: https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-TLS-Proxy/pull/15#issuec...
* What purpose does the Jury serve in 2021? Made sense in the 18th century, doesn't now. Look at Oracle v Google, 12 totally qualified people made that decision (spoiler, they weren't)
* Why do such a mind numbingly high amount of public defender cases end in plea bargains, and why is the average time spent by a public defender on any given case in the order of _minutes_ in _any_ region of the wealthiest nation around?
* What's up with private prisons, and how can they argue they don't have a negative impact on recidivism?
* If the purpose of prison is to pay your time to the community, why do you have a box that must be ticked that seems to push people back towards crime?
I don't think arguing the police are the problem does anything to address much larger systemic issues that seem to have much more dramatic consequences at scale.