sgift

24 ms·

271.
by sgift 3y ago
No. Which is one of the reasons that the guidelines ask to not editorialize headlines. Original articles with clickbait titles are bad enough.
272.
by sgift 3y ago
And not everyone has one in the office. Did we learn something besides platitudes now?
273.
by sgift 3y ago
Let me rephrase it a bit less aggressive, I think "disarming" the discussion is good: I understand the part that you think it works good for you (hey, why else would you use it?) and you hope it can help others. But the 'vibe
274.
by sgift 3y ago
> Speaking of disingenuous, every time the sentry people come in here to talk it's always strawmen. Good that I'm not the only one who feels that way. Every comment by Sentry people I've read here so far was basically a mi
275.
by sgift 3y ago
It's where I partially got it from - but thanks for the link. The whole conversation just reminded me of it.
276.
by sgift 3y ago
And if your use case allows it it is a great model. Easy to setup, easy to debug, easy to run. Also, why I love the new virtual threads in Java. Will they work as good as hoped? No idea. Probably not for all use cases. But the direction
277.
by sgift 3y ago
To be honest, I find this really refreshing in a - to me - weird way, cause at least no one lies to themselves or the other. It reminds me of what people say about Oracle, that it only has one goal: To make money. No bullshit about mission
278.
by sgift 3y ago
> If you join a consultancy group, and 2 months later quit with the client roster... is it really OK to poach all their clients to start your own consultancy? Yes, of course. Neither the employees nor the clients are the property of the
279.
by sgift 3y ago
> It’s quite a civilized system and I think the law ought to leave it alone, (..) Or codify it. Imho the better alternative. One should never assume that companies won't try to change the system to the detriment of the employee if t
280.
by sgift 3y ago
It's your conjecture that using AI tools doesn't involve a creative act. That conjecture may be true inside your mind, but so far you haven't provided support for it through your words - all you did was scream into the void a
281.
by sgift 3y ago
Doesn't the car owner get the ticket and has to pay if no one else accepts that they drove the car? (That's a serious question. It's how it's done in Germany.)
282.
by sgift 3y ago
"suffer". Being warned when you speed or in the future (cause we all know that HN loves slippery slope arguments) not being able to speed. The horror.
283.
by sgift 3y ago
> I beg to differ. Millions of human beings have suffered immense repression from this regime. Who exactly has "suffered immense repression from this regime"? Can you give at least a few examples for recent times? Or did you me
284.
by sgift 3y ago
That comparison hinges on having to click "yes, I'm over 13" being more of a fence+sign than a "tiny" text saying you should only use the website if you are 13 or older. I'm sure some lawyer will argue that&#x2
285.
by sgift 3y ago
And in the EU parliament elections.
286.
by sgift 3y ago
Yeah. And if you want them to fix their heuristics they tell you to pound sand unless you are willing to pay them a consulting fee to "work with you". Sounds like a protection racket to me, but for some reason it seems to be legal
287.
by sgift 3y ago
What counts as aggressive is obviously a personal opinion, but what it did was open an (ignorable) dialog in the url bar stating that Edge is based on the same technology as Chrome and with better performance (and a button to switch to the
288.
by sgift 3y ago
No, 1/5 of Rust code contains unsafe directly. Also, "the" point (in the area of safe/unsafe) is to manage unsafety and provide safe abstractions from unsafe foundations. If you go deep enough there's always somethi
289.
by sgift 3y ago
If you only used stable rust (i.e. not nightly) I would be interested in an example of code you wrote 4 month ago that you cannot compile anymore.
290.
by sgift 3y ago
> No one else seemed to be buying tickets so I did not buy tickets. Because most people have a long term ticket. (is that the correct term in English? I mean one that's valid for a week, month or year)
291.
by sgift 3y ago
I have seen your posts and that you don't like the man. I don't like supporting Trump either. But that has nothing to do with the statement above. edit: Since you edited your post since I've answered: I also disagree with his
292.
by sgift 3y ago
You are free to show that the statement was wrong.
293.
by sgift 3y ago
Which ones are you talking about?
294.
by sgift 3y ago
> They also mention the rather strong transport laws, that most likely prohibit them from offering the same model as in the US. (But I really don’t know.) You are correct. Uber tried their usual model here and we threw the law at them. T
295.
by sgift 3y ago
> SSRIs don’t work for many people and we only found out 2-3 years ago. If you only found out 2-3 years ago that SSRIs don't work for many people that's decidedly a you-problem. Psychiatry has known this for ages, which is one
296.
by sgift 3y ago
Do you mean rt.com? I just accessed that cesspool and Germany is part of the EU, so .. nope. Not banned.
297.
by sgift 3y ago
No, it's not. It's different technologies each time that their research lab is working on at the moment.
298.
by sgift 3y ago
Afaik there are companies/investment products which can only invest in AAA. As long as two of three rating agencies said the US was still AAA they could probably argue that that counts. Now that it's 1/3 that probably won&#x2
299.
by sgift 3y ago
> Edit: And, when I refresh it's not dead... I don't understand this system apparently. If enough people vouch for a dead comment it goes back to normal. That's probably what you saw.
300.
by sgift 3y ago
Could yes? Will it be? I can tell you when you don't need the answer anymore, i.e. in a few years. It's the very nature of the hype cycle that it is very hard to distinguish from a real thing.

More ›