Yes, we agree it’s not about the cost. As long as the benefit remains, the loss can be assessed. A negative return alone doesn’t automatically disqualify a program.
If we lose $100 curing all diseases should we stop doing it? It’s just an odd argument for government - the purpose wasn’t profit and the argument that it was will put entitlements on the chopping blocks with the same excuse.
Seems like an excuse that might be fine for small indie teams for a while. The blog certainly blurs the lines between unit and functional tests. In the end, even modest code coverage can pay off. Tests help with code review, understanding the codebase, and can provide an easy map for debugging. But if you’re in an environment where everyone is constantly demanding changes and only testing the happy path, then good luck.
How do we know a China man doesn’t work at Sony and is listening in to all PlayStations In households? Actually with all these Alexa devices and so many employees at Amazon it’s probably best to make sure all these devices are controlled by the government. Yes we have freedom of speech and privacy but no where in there did it say all communication shouldn’t be owned and and monitored by your government. It’s for the greater good.
If you told me Facebook directed some AI chatbots here to discuss how great this is, I'd believe you. It seems the initial comments are positive, followed by a lot of arguing. It's usually pointless debates, like whether it's a ban. Yes, it is effectively a ban, similar to imposing a million-dollar tax per gun, or required to be age 85, which essentially bans something protected by an amendment. Then there are those calling for regulations and bans, which is strange. I can manage my app usage and my kids', but I can't control safety regulations for trains carrying toxic chemicals. And then there are the trade war advocates; at what point does this back-and-forth justify losing rights and access? I don't care if China becomes like North Korea. The bill also mentions website and service providers, meaning it could block access through websites too. We should have rights to privacy, encryption, and anonymous whistleblowing without government interference in every social media platform.
Did it? Why didn’t they bring it up in the hearings? They were pretty empty handed and trying to rage people apps have access to wifi.
Maybe you mean something like this “study” https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/tiktok-data-suggests-al... which concludes with “kinda maybe looks like they could possibly favor Chinese interest”. Doing a study and putting out a headline is all it takes to poison the public opinion and exactly what I would expect from the social media companies foaming at the mouth losing market share.
The wording I have seen is congress had a internal meeting about the potential security concerns that could be involved (very likely with every app).
I don’t want to verify myself and I don’t trust the government to not work with Facebook to say they are doing some “zero knowledge proof” and still map us all. Implement a fine for parents in Florida. Let it stay Florida’s problem. If the Amish were in charge we would all be in trouble. Raise your own kids.
I’d imagine someone not signed in would load up the safe mode generic list from js and the federated server preferences and if you want to reveal a word you can as a anonymous reader or set a cookie with preference sort of like turning off safe mode on duck go without having to sign in. Of course signing in would have your long term preferences. This allows racist to still send people to links with comments revealed I believe based on server or link url param … as aggressive as it can be it’s not really nuking comments and a freedom of speech issue
I’m surprised mods are even needed for some of it, a star hash on the n word requiring a double click atLeast would have been a little less aggressive. I’m sure beyond that some basic llm bot could run and flag the rest and humans could just review challenged ones but it seems standard to flag some basics words to demotivate some of the crowd.
Yelp. Reductionism and perfectionism to attack something. It’s just a {blank} or it can only detect cancer 98% of the time. I’d like to coin the the hot tub Time Machine argument but that’s probably already a thing.
TLDR; probably the same as how many people try out for professional football and the few that get in for high pay. They want the best.
There’s a correlation to quantity of applicants and pay. You can lower pay in high demand jobs but you’re lowering your funnel for the best applications buried in the bunch. This doesn’t matter for a cashier job since you aren’t looking for world class cashiers to disrupt your industry.