It's like a technology time bomb. If businesses are struggling to cope with a limited subset of basic programming languages like Cobol and assembler, they are going to have a nightmare dealing with obscure frameworks.
I'm actually surprised that graduates can still enter the web industry without receiving specialist training - that's how graduates are dealt with if they go down the Cobol route and work for one of the big IT multinationals who maintain these sorts of systems.
Why do they even need to label certain candidates? To me it just looks like propaganda, or some sort of group signalling.
It's subconsciously saying the following: "Hey don't trust this one candidate because we don't like that sort of thing and have attached a warning every time her name is mentioned. The other candidates are fine, even the extreme far left one, so no label needed - maybe we will add one for them on a rare occasion."
I'm almost certain this sort of propaganda is the reason why the public spew hatred at certain candidates, yet often cannot back up that hatred in relation to their policies or behavour. Just so you know, I'm not backing a political figure here, just pointing out what I notice when I read news websites - particularly the big outlets.
It goes both ways though. The EU funds all sorts of groups, in particular NGOs. Those groups then do publicity stunts and pay for advertising during important events. There's so many players on the scene that there's little point blaming one single entity - doing so means you are just playing into the hands of the other guys. If the media start hyping something en mass then treat it with suspicion.
It reminds me of the early 2000s when websites would initiate a pop-up ad and the first thing I would do is automatically close it without looking. Thankfully browser makers stepped in and blocked them automatically. That's my hope. That news outlets will spam the feature so much that web browsers will make it easy to switch them off.
Those large media distributions didn't appear out of nowhere, they were built by entrepreneurs and communities. They slowly merged into the huge operations that exist today. That said, those publications have got so big that some have become divorced from reality... you only have to look as outlets like The Guardian and the huge losses they continue to absorb. Extreme even by industry standards.
> And if reports are to believed, Russia's meddling is behind Brexit...
D'oh. There was me thinking I made the decision on my own, I even researched loads of topics by buying books and stuff, only to find out on HN that those meddling Ruskies did it all along. I will agree with you on pipelines though.
UK. Modern cinemas are built with multiple restaurants often with an entrance inside the restaurant itself.
In extreme cases you have to walk from the entrance to the back of the complex (passing by maybe a dozen bars and restaurants), get to the end, hop on an escalator to the next floor and walk all the way back past more outlets. It's only then you reach the cinema.
I don't think it was like that in the beginning. Running a cinema (movie theater) was a normal business until Hollywood milked it to the extreme. They created their own chains of multiplexes in many countries to push their idea of how the business should work.
These days modern cinemas are built like tourist traps with customers having to either walk through/past chain restaurants or having to find some weird side door to enter directly. It's quite a difference to even the 80s or 90s when cinemas had impressive/glamorous lobbies.
> Doesn't anyone honestly sell a real product that you can take at face value anymore?
It's all about risk. Outsourcing means companies transfer risk to other parties. Governments love to do it too, that's why entities like the EU are given sovereign power or public transport is privatised. What's this? A train crashed because of a poorly maintained rail? Scheduled maintenance overran and commuters are angry? The power grid is experiencing brown outs because there's not enough power stations? Sorry, that third party is to blame... bad third party! I totally understand why it's annoying, but I have nothing to do with third party etc.
So in a way, United taking the blame for these things is refreshing. They are treating the outsourcing as their own responsibility.
Labour's problem is they are basically two parties, the metropolitan socialists (remain) and working classes (leave). I doubt any leader would be able to fight this upcoming general election - it's a huge mess for them.
Honestly. I think its main problem is it's not hipster enough. It's too popular. I bet if you made it difficult to use (for most people), added features that make certain aspects a nightmare to scale and gave it a weird name then it would do well here. Obviously don't let anyone know about the origin... say you built it at a series of obscure coding bootcamps.
They are currently doing a big redesign for self employment. Basically moving from a yearly overview of accounts to an on-demand system - where you pay taxes as they are charged. I hope they don't force people to use the new method.
I always buy appliances that are mid-to-lower range. There's none of the over engineered smart technology and they last decades rather than years.
I think once you've spent enough time submerged in technology, you start to appreciate the simpler things in life. A smart washing machine or microwave isn't one of them.
It should really be called the "Creators' Update". My guess is either Microsoft's marketing people don't like apostrophes or someone at Microsoft doesn't want creators to get the idea that they have ownership of the update.
I'm actually surprised that graduates can still enter the web industry without receiving specialist training - that's how graduates are dealt with if they go down the Cobol route and work for one of the big IT multinationals who maintain these sorts of systems.