The best way to improve sub-standard code is to help the person producing it make it better. I find this to be extremely effective, far more so than being passive-aggressive or just aggressive.
Projects aren't forced to take in substandard code but some projects have experienced severe losses by trying your approach and giving an inch. Take firefox as an example.
What incident are you referring to specifically?
I can name at leas two really good Linux kernel developers that Linus's attitude pushed away. They made a lot of valuable contributions: Matthew Garrett and Sarah Sharp.
Respect is how we make living together more tolerable. By assuming a basic level of good faith and treating others in the manner you we would also like to be treated life is a lot easier than if it's just "every man for himself".
Playing well with others is a merit, especially in a large software project.
In fact only caring about technical ability and nothing about social skills is a pretty common aspect of autism and generally considered something that people with autism struggle to overcome. And they do have to try to overcome it, because while understanding and tolerance are important there are also limits to what other employees will tolerate and what employment law allows for.
Is there any evidence, even mere suggestion that Linus was made to do this by the dreaded SJWs? It seems like he came to this realization on his own and decided to change his behaviour.
Or are you saying that Linus is now an SJW himself?
Are you defending their behaviour or saying it should be ignored?
Before you answer I must remind you of your response to a developer calling out mansplaining when it wasn't justified on Twitter, and ask how you square your answer with your reaction to that person.
What PDF reader are you using that enforces the no copy flag? I've got The official Adobe one on Android and can copy the text.
"Looked at conversely, 85% of the students who had access to only one device were classified as underserved. These data, of course, might also suggest that students whose families are wealthier or whose parents are more highly educated tend to have access to a higher number of devices."
The paper makes it clear that they are using those factors because their other research and work has found that they are good indicators and correlate closely.
This is common practice because otherwise it's hard to categorise large numbers of students without doing expensive, time consuming investigations. It's a proven and valid technique used in other sciences too, such as medicine and mechanical engineering.
Sigh. Do you really think these underserved kids are going to get a solid education that negates the need for internet access? Maybe they have a first rate library just down the road too.
The internet was supposed to make education more accessible. It does, but the cost of internet access is still relatively high. A little phone screen isn't ideal, and remember this is "access", meaning it could be shared between everyone in the household.
Everything you don't like is virtue signalling. Your complaints about virtue signalling are virtue signalling. It's a completely meaningless statement.
Say why you don't think this will make any real difference.
I bought my mum a Chromebook because Windows and Firefox were confusing for her. She's not a novice, she actually had training in Windows and Office, but there is still a lot of crap that she can't handle.
So there is utility in being simple. What we need is apps that have a simple mode and a power user mode. Considering how flexible the Firefox UI is supposed to be it seems like they missed an opportunity there.
That happened to me back around 2000, and I found the only way to fix it was too email the customers. One of them told me that she went to their office to complain.
I don't get full day interviews. My work history and experience is the most important thing and we can go over than in an hour. I'm not a graduate so all the other silly tests just tell me they don't know what they are doing and I probably don't want to work there.
Banana equivalent dose has been debunked many times here. The body is designed to handle eating potassium and passes any excess out. It isn't so good with ionising radiation.
Not that this type of radiation is a huge deal either, just that using banana as a comparison is flawed.
My mum keeps getting mail for a few different American women who don't carefully spell out their email addresses. Medical data, appointments, financial info etc. She just deletes it all, after failing to get them to be more careful.
Wouldn't this person need to go through a lot of training first? Training with the rest of the crew, who are presumably SpaceX or NASA personnel.
I wonder what the trip will be like. Apollo and the planned Russian vehicles were very basic in terms of things like sleeping and toilet facilities. Probably won't be very comfortable but hopefully some improvements have been made.
I wonder what they will wear too. Full suits are bulky and only really need for emergencies, mostly on ascent/rentry.
A Japanese man was the first commercial space passenger back in the day, working for a Japanese TV company. Maybe it's the same deal, TV company is paying for one of its staff to go. Essentially funded by advertising.
That is demonstrably untrue. On YouTube you can find videos about how women destroy civilisations, "race realism", how Hitler was actually an okay guy...
At the same time a lot of progressive channels get false flagged and there is little they can do about it. This suggests incompetence, not systemic bias.
That makes language very boring, and isn't true anyway.
The word shit refers to something most people want nothing to do with, a substance they find disgusting. That's what gives it its power to shock; confronting the listener with that image.
If you really do consider all words to be merely there to convey meaning then language gets very dull. That's one of the worst things about advertising - it devalues and neuters words.
Slashdot Mirror
The best way to improve sub-standard code is to help the person producing it make it better. I find this to be extremely effective, far more so than being passive-aggressive or just aggressive.
Projects aren't forced to take in substandard code but some projects have experienced severe losses by trying your approach and giving an inch. Take firefox as an example.
What incident are you referring to specifically?
I can name at leas two really good Linux kernel developers that Linus's attitude pushed away. They made a lot of valuable contributions: Matthew Garrett and Sarah Sharp.
Respect is how we make living together more tolerable. By assuming a basic level of good faith and treating others in the manner you we would also like to be treated life is a lot easier than if it's just "every man for himself".
Do you treat everyone you meet with zero respect until they earn it? Or do you afford everyone a basic level of respect by default?
Playing well with others is a merit, especially in a large software project.
In fact only caring about technical ability and nothing about social skills is a pretty common aspect of autism and generally considered something that people with autism struggle to overcome. And they do have to try to overcome it, because while understanding and tolerance are important there are also limits to what other employees will tolerate and what employment law allows for.
Seems like pushing away good coders with your bad attitude is not a great way to improve code quality.
Is there any evidence, even mere suggestion that Linus was made to do this by the dreaded SJWs? It seems like he came to this realization on his own and decided to change his behaviour.
Or are you saying that Linus is now an SJW himself?
Are you defending their behaviour or saying it should be ignored?
Before you answer I must remind you of your response to a developer calling out mansplaining when it wasn't justified on Twitter, and ask how you square your answer with your reaction to that person.
What PDF reader are you using that enforces the no copy flag? I've got The official Adobe one on Android and can copy the text.
"Looked at conversely, 85% of the students who had access to only one
device were classified as underserved. These data, of course, might also suggest that students whose families are wealthier or whose parents are more highly educated tend to have access to a higher number of devices."
The paper makes it clear that they are using those factors because their other research and work has found that they are good indicators and correlate closely.
This is common practice because otherwise it's hard to categorise large numbers of students without doing expensive, time consuming investigations. It's a proven and valid technique used in other sciences too, such as medicine and mechanical engineering.
Sigh. Do you really think these underserved kids are going to get a solid education that negates the need for internet access? Maybe they have a first rate library just down the road too.
The internet was supposed to make education more accessible. It does, but the cost of internet access is still relatively high. A little phone screen isn't ideal, and remember this is "access", meaning it could be shared between everyone in the household.
They are trying to make a "no fault" divorce possible because it's become clear that these requirements are a bit antiquated.
The verification part is when they ask you about those projects and you can answer questions about them in some detail.
Everything you don't like is virtue signalling. Your complaints about virtue signalling are virtue signalling. It's a completely meaningless statement.
Say why you don't think this will make any real difference.
I bought my mum a Chromebook because Windows and Firefox were confusing for her. She's not a novice, she actually had training in Windows and Office, but there is still a lot of crap that she can't handle.
So there is utility in being simple. What we need is apps that have a simple mode and a power user mode. Considering how flexible the Firefox UI is supposed to be it seems like they missed an opportunity there.
What other platforms do you use? I've had good luck with Monster
LinkedIn has too many data breeches, and I don't want the social aspects. Monster is just a CV/job listing site.
That happened to me back around 2000, and I found the only way to fix it was too email the customers. One of them told me that she went to their office to complain.
Everyone thinks they want first.last@domain.com until they get every idiots mail.
I don't get full day interviews. My work history and experience is the most important thing and we can go over than in an hour. I'm not a graduate so all the other silly tests just tell me they don't know what they are doing and I probably don't want to work there.
Banana equivalent dose has been debunked many times here. The body is designed to handle eating potassium and passes any excess out. It isn't so good with ionising radiation.
Not that this type of radiation is a huge deal either, just that using banana as a comparison is flawed.
My mum keeps getting mail for a few different American women who don't carefully spell out their email addresses. Medical data, appointments, financial info etc. She just deletes it all, after failing to get them to be more careful.
Wouldn't this person need to go through a lot of training first? Training with the rest of the crew, who are presumably SpaceX or NASA personnel.
I wonder what the trip will be like. Apollo and the planned Russian vehicles were very basic in terms of things like sleeping and toilet facilities. Probably won't be very comfortable but hopefully some improvements have been made.
I wonder what they will wear too. Full suits are bulky and only really need for emergencies, mostly on ascent/rentry.
A Japanese man was the first commercial space passenger back in the day, working for a Japanese TV company. Maybe it's the same deal, TV company is paying for one of its staff to go. Essentially funded by advertising.
That is demonstrably untrue. On YouTube you can find videos about how women destroy civilisations, "race realism", how Hitler was actually an okay guy...
At the same time a lot of progressive channels get false flagged and there is little they can do about it. This suggests incompetence, not systemic bias.
That makes language very boring, and isn't true anyway.
The word shit refers to something most people want nothing to do with, a substance they find disgusting. That's what gives it its power to shock; confronting the listener with that image.
If you really do consider all words to be merely there to convey meaning then language gets very dull. That's one of the worst things about advertising - it devalues and neuters words.