The UX of development tools is such an incredibly fundamental thing to fix.
Back in the day it was acceptable to build things without thinking how easy they were to use, indeed being "easy" was somehow a bad thing, like people who used to deride users of Mac OS.
The same applies to development tools, you aren't dumb if your tool is unhelpful, and if it takes 5 seconds less to see a problem, multiply that by how often that problem is encountered around the world, and you're making a significant difference to productivity.
Not to mention developer sanity. Why should designers have nice tools and we get tools that hate us?
Forbes says "It is a numerical index that ranges from 0 to 100 and incorporates the win-ratio, or percentage of days that Bitcoin is up, and the upside less downside volatility."
Won't this just take the battleground about what is "fact" or not to Wikipedia?
If someone was trying to discredit say, Obama, and saw "Barrack Obama was born in the United States - according to Wikipedia" surely they'd rush there and try to sneak conspiracy theories past the moderators.
So what happens then, Wiki has to lock down more and more pages, or effectively only allow approved edits to topics people are trying to shill over.
That happens, and it's no longer the crowd-sourced/accepted truth, it's Wikipedia moderators truth.
Back in the day it was acceptable to build things without thinking how easy they were to use, indeed being "easy" was somehow a bad thing, like people who used to deride users of Mac OS.
The same applies to development tools, you aren't dumb if your tool is unhelpful, and if it takes 5 seconds less to see a problem, multiply that by how often that problem is encountered around the world, and you're making a significant difference to productivity.
Not to mention developer sanity. Why should designers have nice tools and we get tools that hate us?