Which is very difficult to do in any significant level of traffic because there always seems to be at least one idiot who gets into the gap. Flipside though, in very dense European traffic (think Belgian rush hour), "parking" yourself a safe distance behind a heavy lorry on the motorway slow lane is ridiculously calm driving, and ironically usually faster than the other two lanes where idiot drivers keep slowing each other down trying to overtake when there is *nowhere to go*.
Plus you get the reduced drag effect to up your MPG to 60-70 in the right car.
You can sort that kind of stuff out in UX testing: you can see what they are doing if you're there, in the room with them, while they are doing it, and your tester knows you are watching them. Instead of this surreptitious "it's for UX reasons, honest, and we buried it on page 24 of the EULA in a locked filing cabinet in a disused lavatory behind a sign that says "beware of the leopard"*. Can we please start putting users' rights above our own damn convenience as developers? Thanks.
(*Not that it is even IN the EULA in this case, so there's that.)
If you'd even read the article you linked, you would see that the amyloid plaque "cages" are left behind after the infectious agent has been killed, so yes, treating the plaques would actually make great sense - the human body fights off the infection and a non-invasive simple treatment removes the detritus. Of course, the testing will have to reveal how the brain reacts to this, but it could be a great way of staving off dementia.
I'm on my second (C-Max this time, regular Focus hatch the first). It does need to be revved fairly high for torque, but I have never stalled unless I was driving it like it's a 2 litre diesel (as in "expecting it to take off from a standing start in second gear"). You do have to shift gears a bit more often, and I have made my displeasure known to the car verbally when I was in the "suggested" gear for the car and tried to accelerate. It seems to love suggesting going to 6th gear from 40MPH upwards. ONLY if you're doing a constant speed on a level, because even a slight hill will completely take the oomph out until you downshift, usually by at least two gears. I easily hit 45-47MPG with the first one on longish journeys, closer to 40MPG when I was doing lots of tiny trips. About 2-3 MPG less with the heavier, bulkier C-Max.
Is it as fun/easy to drive as a bigger engine with more torque? Hell no, it's quite dull, but then it's more or less the textbook "family" car, and I quite like how it seems designed to prevent me from doing anything stupid in a fit of road-rage with my family in the car.
If your software development method is not working: you do it wrong! Regardless what kind of method you use.
See, that's pretty close to what I meant in the GP post: if your team is already good at developing software, they are still good when doing it the "Agile" way. It doesn't really make them better. It certainly doesn't make a weak team better (usually quite the opposite, because management will tend to leverage parts of Agile against the team in the worst possible way). You know, I like the agile manifesto. I think there are quite a few things in there that really ring true (for good teams). But Agile/Scrum/XP as a "process" just is too vague and badly-described to be a "prescriptive" way of successfully delivering software, and too often simply devolves into a religion for the sake of the sacred text instead of actually just delivering something the customer/end user needs.
Judging from 20 years experience doing it, I think delivering software just isn't something that is easily poured into a recipe-like process. It's different every time, and there's always the fuzzy people-factor. As Joel Spolsky once said, get the people that can "just get stuff done". They'll figure their own way of doing things, and it doesn't need a "Process".
The parent post is a great example of the "You're Not Doing It Right" fallback of Agilists. Agile is something that works in teams that would have succeeded just as well with any other methodology that isn't downright insane, and something that is pretty damn difficult to actually get to work in most real-world situations. There's always a litany of excuses of how you're not doing it right, but no Agile proponent can ever quite exactly say how to make sure you *do* get it right either.
Or port it to DBG's Forgelight engine, then after a year sue them for h1z1 copying them but going back in time and doing it earlier.
PUBG know very well what a total pile of shite Forgelight is, they wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole, even with the massive stupidity of suing Epic.
Yeah, I had the same feeling when I read this here a few days ago. I'm not even that old, but many people around me are already passing away. Rest in peace Robin, you will be missed. Thanks for the/.
It's OK, Spotify have done their damnedest to kill off the playlist anyway. These morons have disabled shuffling a playlist-of-playlists from mobile devices, which was a big part of the reason for me to have premium - so I could listen to well-organized downloaded music offline in my car, from my phone. This is a service that just keeps getting *worse* with every improvement, and they deliberately don't do "what's new" lists with every release for that reason - because you'd see all the shit they've REMOVED.
You've got that backwards. The reason millennials are less loyal to companies is because companies started become less loyal first. As an employee you'll often be chucked at the first signs of bad weather, especially when working in a department that's often seen as a cost center (which IT/software development often is).
So, be loyal, but don't be a fool. You can skip a raise or two if you know business isn't that great, but on #3 you come right out and say that you're losing money staying and that's not fair to yourself or your family. If you get the "in line with industry averages" shtick, ask them whether they'd be happy with industry average quality and productivity. Do not ever sell yourself short.
I met my wife through online dating. We had a lot of fun talking about our horrible online dating experiences on our first few dates. It's clear that some women get a lot more "interest" from men than men get from women, the bigger problem is that 90% of the people on dating sites (men or women) are basically lunatics, and not in a good way.
I had the woman who thought it was hilarious to joke about how her dog would eat my cat. I had the one who after chatting for a good while finally came out to say she was married but was looking to introduce polyamory into their arrangement. My wife had the guy who proposed to her after a few dates, the compulsive liar who then ironically went on to contact one of my wife's friends online with more lies, even though they had already met in real life.... goldfish memory, too many lies to keep them straight. And generally just a whole bunch of guys who put zero effort into contacting her, just a basic "hi" in the hopes of getting a response.
However, the whole "jerks" vs "good guys" thing is baloney. You can be a good guy and be interesting, those two are not mutually exclusive at all. If you can't find a single way to make yourself interesting then change your life habits to be more interesting. Take up a different hobby. Read more. Work out. Be funny. Put some effort into it. And for everyone's sake guys, look further than their physical appearance in a few well-chosen and doctored website shots.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you know what they call alternative medicine that works?
Medicine.
Oh Facebook gets privacy, it's just that it is literally antithetical to their business model, which is to sell your data.
Which is very difficult to do in any significant level of traffic because there always seems to be at least one idiot who gets into the gap. Flipside though, in very dense European traffic (think Belgian rush hour), "parking" yourself a safe distance behind a heavy lorry on the motorway slow lane is ridiculously calm driving, and ironically usually faster than the other two lanes where idiot drivers keep slowing each other down trying to overtake when there is *nowhere to go*.
Plus you get the reduced drag effect to up your MPG to 60-70 in the right car.
Just look at all the special characters you wasted in that post!
(*Not that it is even IN the EULA in this case, so there's that.)
Cargo trousers. I don't want to carry anything around the parts of my clothing that also need to flex for mobility.
If you'd even read the article you linked, you would see that the amyloid plaque "cages" are left behind after the infectious agent has been killed, so yes, treating the plaques would actually make great sense - the human body fights off the infection and a non-invasive simple treatment removes the detritus. Of course, the testing will have to reveal how the brain reacts to this, but it could be a great way of staving off dementia.
You've killed your own point there: you didn't manage to distinguish correctly between "from Amazon" and "through Amazon" yourself in your OP.
If they honour it as much as the "Download via Wi-Fi" option, what's the point?
I'm on my second (C-Max this time, regular Focus hatch the first). It does need to be revved fairly high for torque, but I have never stalled unless I was driving it like it's a 2 litre diesel (as in "expecting it to take off from a standing start in second gear"). You do have to shift gears a bit more often, and I have made my displeasure known to the car verbally when I was in the "suggested" gear for the car and tried to accelerate. It seems to love suggesting going to 6th gear from 40MPH upwards. ONLY if you're doing a constant speed on a level, because even a slight hill will completely take the oomph out until you downshift, usually by at least two gears. I easily hit 45-47MPG with the first one on longish journeys, closer to 40MPG when I was doing lots of tiny trips. About 2-3 MPG less with the heavier, bulkier C-Max. Is it as fun/easy to drive as a bigger engine with more torque? Hell no, it's quite dull, but then it's more or less the textbook "family" car, and I quite like how it seems designed to prevent me from doing anything stupid in a fit of road-rage with my family in the car.
I got a bigger one.
I'm pretty happy with my second 1L turbo petrol thanks very much, so that rules out "nobody".
The music. It was awesome, and it made the whole movie worth watching.
If your software development method is not working: you do it wrong! Regardless what kind of method you use.
See, that's pretty close to what I meant in the GP post: if your team is already good at developing software, they are still good when doing it the "Agile" way. It doesn't really make them better. It certainly doesn't make a weak team better (usually quite the opposite, because management will tend to leverage parts of Agile against the team in the worst possible way). You know, I like the agile manifesto. I think there are quite a few things in there that really ring true (for good teams). But Agile/Scrum/XP as a "process" just is too vague and badly-described to be a "prescriptive" way of successfully delivering software, and too often simply devolves into a religion for the sake of the sacred text instead of actually just delivering something the customer/end user needs.
Judging from 20 years experience doing it, I think delivering software just isn't something that is easily poured into a recipe-like process. It's different every time, and there's always the fuzzy people-factor. As Joel Spolsky once said, get the people that can "just get stuff done". They'll figure their own way of doing things, and it doesn't need a "Process".
The parent post is a great example of the "You're Not Doing It Right" fallback of Agilists. Agile is something that works in teams that would have succeeded just as well with any other methodology that isn't downright insane, and something that is pretty damn difficult to actually get to work in most real-world situations. There's always a litany of excuses of how you're not doing it right, but no Agile proponent can ever quite exactly say how to make sure you *do* get it right either.
Or port it to DBG's Forgelight engine, then after a year sue them for h1z1 copying them but going back in time and doing it earlier.
PUBG know very well what a total pile of shite Forgelight is, they wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole, even with the massive stupidity of suing Epic.
Yeah, I had the same feeling when I read this here a few days ago. I'm not even that old, but many people around me are already passing away. Rest in peace Robin, you will be missed. Thanks for the /.
It's OK, Spotify have done their damnedest to kill off the playlist anyway. These morons have disabled shuffling a playlist-of-playlists from mobile devices, which was a big part of the reason for me to have premium - so I could listen to well-organized downloaded music offline in my car, from my phone. This is a service that just keeps getting *worse* with every improvement, and they deliberately don't do "what's new" lists with every release for that reason - because you'd see all the shit they've REMOVED.
No it hasn't, at least not on actual tech stories.
You've got that backwards. The reason millennials are less loyal to companies is because companies started become less loyal first. As an employee you'll often be chucked at the first signs of bad weather, especially when working in a department that's often seen as a cost center (which IT/software development often is).
So, be loyal, but don't be a fool. You can skip a raise or two if you know business isn't that great, but on #3 you come right out and say that you're losing money staying and that's not fair to yourself or your family. If you get the "in line with industry averages" shtick, ask them whether they'd be happy with industry average quality and productivity. Do not ever sell yourself short.
A real shame when the Cure's Disintegration actually had "this album was mixed to be played loud" in the liner notes.
The main server was heard to mutter "Fuck man, maybe that's what hell is: the entire rest of eternity spent in fuckin' Bruges".
That sounds like a variation on Brook's Law - adding more people to a late project makes it later.
I met my wife through online dating. We had a lot of fun talking about our horrible online dating experiences on our first few dates. It's clear that some women get a lot more "interest" from men than men get from women, the bigger problem is that 90% of the people on dating sites (men or women) are basically lunatics, and not in a good way.
I had the woman who thought it was hilarious to joke about how her dog would eat my cat. I had the one who after chatting for a good while finally came out to say she was married but was looking to introduce polyamory into their arrangement. My wife had the guy who proposed to her after a few dates, the compulsive liar who then ironically went on to contact one of my wife's friends online with more lies, even though they had already met in real life.... goldfish memory, too many lies to keep them straight. And generally just a whole bunch of guys who put zero effort into contacting her, just a basic "hi" in the hopes of getting a response.
However, the whole "jerks" vs "good guys" thing is baloney. You can be a good guy and be interesting, those two are not mutually exclusive at all. If you can't find a single way to make yourself interesting then change your life habits to be more interesting. Take up a different hobby. Read more. Work out. Be funny. Put some effort into it. And for everyone's sake guys, look further than their physical appearance in a few well-chosen and doctored website shots.
This deserves to be modded higher. It's kind of a paradigm-shifting view on equality and diversity.