splaytreemap

I disagree. If all companies are forced to use the same components, it removes the incentive for companies to innovate on those components. Why bother building a better battery lock if you're not allowed to use it in your products without giving it to your competitors first?

People bypass this step all the time. The difference is they all have a good faith belief their managers would approve the change if they were available. Spiers 100% knew her changes wouldn't be approved by project leadership, and she used an emergency push to bypass their review.

Honestly, the fact that she has the gall to complain to the NLRB about this firing is pretty despicable. Google should be suing her for defamation.

I have the same experience as the above user. I primarily watch guitar and exercise videos, and have never had any complaints about the youtube algorithm. The one algorithm I do feel underperforms is Spotify's. For some reason, their discover weekly is always filled with covers of songs I already have in my playlists.

Hunting down this guy's Twitter in an effort to defame him tells me even you think your argument is too weak to be persuasive. You're working really hard to avoid debating him on the merits of his argument. Leave off the ad-hominem attacks in the future.

Salesforce doesn't get dragged into anti-tech sentiment because they build a b2b product. The Twitter activists who lead most of the anti-tech crusades don't know what CRM is or what it does because they never interact with it because they are unemployed.

The people who do use Salesforce for the most part hate it. But you'll never see widespread outrage about Salesforce because the people who use it have jobs, families, and friends that prevent them from spending all day on social media.

Implying people are children for holding different views than you is way less persuasive than you seem to think it is.

We shouldn't be using fiction to inform anything about our actions in real life.

I don't know how you expect these companies to prove their vaccine protects against asymptomatic long-term damage when nobody can prove asymptomatic long-term damage exists in the first place. It's like asking a home security company to prove their system keeps leprechauns out of the house.

It means 95% of people exposed to the virus who would have otherwise gotten sick, do not get sick.

Saying that isn't going to stop the news from running a story about the one healthy young person who died from it. The only way to counter this sort of disinformation campaign from the media is to individually tell the story of the 99,999 other healthy young people who got it and we're fine.

Loading a tweet really isn't that hard; it's just Twitter's engineering team is incompetent. Even tiny little websites that custom-roll their own forums have less trouble loading their content than Twitter.