I think that's because you can usually smell when food is close to being rotten before you can see it...
EDIT: reading the WardsWiki reference from that Wikipedia page, there's also the point made by early users of the term that smells are something you have to check out, but don't always mean something needs fixing - e.g. a bad smell may be a gas leak, or it may just be a rubbish bin.
The author doesn't say you can't use features with 98% (or even less) support.
What they say is that you have to ensure that your site still works for the remaining users, through graceful degradation.
If people have new fancy browsers, use their features to make the interface jazzy. If they don't, ensure that the site still offers its core functionality to them without the fancy features.
Pepsi starts using AI in some magical way that allows them to increase their margins. This allows them to reduce prices while increasing profits. Price-sensitive customers switch from Coca Cola products to Pepsi products. Coca Cola loses some market share, reducing economies of scale, and reducing margins, thus reducing profits. As the cycle repeats, Pepsi moves to dominate the market, and Coca Cola is slowly squeezed down.
Yep, I found that one too - this paper <https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12710904/> assumes immunocompetent mice, while the sepsis one was in a patient who was immunocompromised (both by the cancer and by chemo).
Given that many cancer sufferers are immunocompromised, this isn't necessarily a silver bullet, although it is an interesting result.
Details of acquisition of assets which may incur tax or legal treatment on disposal?
Ongoing contracts (e.g. life insurance policies may last 40+ years). I did work for an insurance company once, and they had active policies started prior to 1940. There were electronic documents which dated back 30+ years.
While completed transactions may only need records for a few years, ongoing assets and contracts need documentation held for much longer.
Because that is a marginal system, (and unless they've messed up the calculations, which they haven't in this case) you should never end up with less from earning more. Can you give an example of two income amounts where the lower income ends up with more money after-taxes than the higher income?
Or is it the additional municipal, church, or health levies mentioned on that page which have the discontinuities?
> ... unless it is made directly to an origin server that has previously indicated, in or out of band, that such a request has a purpose and will be adequately supported.
The point of the deadline is not that you can't be off work, but that you stop getting paid for not working.
For example, the way it works in Australia is that after you have used up your sick days, you have to take any further absences from work out of your annual leave balance, and once that is exhausted, you switch to leave without pay.
I had a downline team member who once needed to extend their time away from work for over 5 months due to illness. They had been with the company for several years at that point, so they had a reasonable sick leave balance, probably 10 weeks. When it became clear that they needed longer, they used their remaining 4 weeks of annual leave, then took a month of leave without pay, then another. They were still employed, I approved their leave requests each time they needed to extend, and we just used the most appropriate tool that was available at the time.
The thing you're getting permission for is not to be sick, it is to be considered still employed while not doing work, rather than being fired/disciplined for being AWOL.
> ... the markets will eventually find out that it's useless, and everything will go back to normal, and the people you don't like will have lost money, so there's no point in being outraged...
Except that in the process of the markets finding out, things will not go back to normal if everyone's retirement is tied to the market. And in the process of finding out, things will not go back to normal if the hype cycle disrupts traditional hiring/firing decisions.
If it's as bad as some of us believe, then when it falls apart, a lot of people get hurt as collateral damage.
The market eventually found out about Bear Stearns, but a lot of innocent people lost their homes in the process.
Exactly. The question is not "are people using it to do stuff?" because we know right now they are. Given free or heavily-subsidised access to powerful tools, people will use them.
If I had someone giving me free access to cranes and excavators, I'd be raving about how easy it was to build houses now. But tomorrow when I have to pay full price for them, I'm going to be making very different calculations about return on investment.
The question we need to be asking is "what is the likely full-price cost we'll have to pay for these tools, and is that cost likely to be worth paying?"
What Ed's pointing to is that the full-price cost will have to cover the capital expenditures that have been invested, or the companies which risked that capital will go bust. That gives us a floor for what the full price cost will be, and that floor seems higher than the value being offered by the tools.
The trick is in the wording - they probably aren't getting that many subs. They're saying they "expect" to get that many, at some point in the mythical future.
EDIT: reading the WardsWiki reference from that Wikipedia page, there's also the point made by early users of the term that smells are something you have to check out, but don't always mean something needs fixing - e.g. a bad smell may be a gas leak, or it may just be a rubbish bin.