If your company is overcompliant, seems to be a company issue. This is a general trend I observed: way too many companies and even government entities don’t do certain things for "privacy reasons", while they’re just lazy and privacy is an excuse.
It’s not like not having a consent banner for necessary cookies will result in a fine right away. Most fines are for serious stuff.
Happened to me with GTA IV and I have been playing all games since GTA 1. Maybe I just grew too old for these story-driven games, but I never finished it and haven't touched GTA V at all. San Andreas was probably my favorite.
The better use case would be to make AI cancel that damn subscription that lets you jump through 20 dark pattern questions and then tells you to call customer support.
- I recently read that most programmers SQL knowledge is outdated by 20 years and it’s true for me. There are quite a lot of features in most DBs that feel very "new" to me.
- Comparing SQL to React weakens the argument. SQL is the language, React is a piece of software. You certainly can run 30 year old JS today in modern browsers.
And yet, no native select + search combined, which is a very common kind of list. The datalist is basically unusable, because you don't know any of the options.
The worst part is that it’s impossible to tell if the author has just "improved" a correct article to add hyperbole or if the whole thing is hallucinated and all explanations are kinda wrong.
The question who will benefit from wealth generated by AI is never clearly answered. Or it's hand-waved away with some productivity gains mumbo jumbo (that never result in less work, just more, because everybody loads up on AI tools) or the good old trickle down lie.
When I started game programming, I thought that game programming means manipulating pixels on a screen. Took a while to understand that the stuff you see is just a representation of the game state in memory. The whole game could run in memory only without any render logic and would still work. That's what game servers do.
Nice idea. Small thing: the categories are pretty much fixed. If you have to abbreviate a never-changing category like "Consumer Defen..." in a widget, your design doesn't work in this aspect.
> It's viewing the situation through the lens of Anglo capitalist opinions.
Came here to say this. It's a very narrow perspective that shows in sub headlines like "Kinship societies are wealth-destroying societies".
One could also take the lens of "Kinship societies are making people's wealth more equal to reduce competition and jealousy, increase harmony and happiness" – although I have no data whether these people are genuinely more happy. It quotes some business-oriented Ghanians who seem quite unhappy about sharing their wealth. And yet, the perspective of indivual wealth over group wealth is assumed and never critically reflected upon.
I'm not saying that their way is better or something like that. I just think that reading the article is a good exercise in reflecting on one's own views on life and wealth.
Question 9 imho is the most German one ("When someone says 'we should get coffee sometime,' you understand this to mean:").
It depends on context a bit obviously, but most Germans are sincere about it. You either propose coffee or you don't.
However, there's a subset of Germans who seem to propose coffee and then don't follow up themselves, but it's not just a phrase. If you are the one to follow up, they'd join you. Which, to say the least, is annoying, too.
From my German perspective, asking someone for grabbing coffee sometime and not meaning it is a completely stupid thing to say. Why would you suggest it? Why should the other person have to decode this as a "nice thing to say but not meant literally" if you could say a hundred other things that could be meant literally and are still nice, like "see you around" or something like that?
Same here. Google lets you refunds or partial refunds and still don’t disclose any customer details. All you see is transaction IDs. I never understood why Apple doesn’t show a history of all IAPs in a similar way with similar control.