Personally, I think you're going through a hard time. An individual and a country are different, but people do rely to some extent on the image of a country when judging an individual. I agree with your logic, so I'll give you an upvote
Some people are wired such that altruism makes them feel good and gives them a sense of purpose. Maybe it's evolutionary, but it doesn't change the fact that they don't think of it as 'virtue signalling' or personal gain when they do it.
In fact the ones who can only classify the behavior as such because they can't even comprehend it look like the real sociopaths.
It's not about feeling bad for Disney. Disney is tremendously powerful, so if the federal government can coerce them to do whatever the federal government wants, that has massive widespread effects for everyone. It creates an environment in which powerful corporations are expected to act as political enforcers, creating a monoculture of ideas and suppressing dissent.
I am an Israeli and though I dislike this certain brand of companies and would never work in one, I am not sure this is strictly bad.
I assume these were hired by a local candidate (unless someone can think who has a deep interest in French municipal elections)
Currently the only actors who use fake social accounts for election manipulation are the Russians, Chinese, Iran and Qatar.
The west is completely powerless in either fighting back, regulating social networks or coming up with a technological solution.
As democracies is being undermined by foreign influence, from Brexit, to the US elections, I'd rather local parties would have access to these tools than the alternative, and that would be only done using private companies.
Of course the better alternative is getting rid of fake accounts and making social media into a unicorn and bunnies hate-free zone, don't think we are headed there though
Does "publication" refer to the software or to something documenting the existence of the bug? Because I thought zero-day meant the bug was exploited the same day the software containing the bug was released, but your phrasing sounds like if you exploit a bug before the maintainers know about it then it's a negative day.
I think at the upper range, and for Teslas, this is true. But for the rest, not quite yet.
Suppose you buy an entry-level Renault 5, the WLTP range is 310km. In mild conditions you typically get 85-90% of that, enough for the majority of people. But in winter you get 65% of that, so 195km, on a new battery. And after 5 years that may be 165km in winter, and that's just not great. With home-charging that still is enough for most requirements, but you are more restricted for longer trips and have to charge diligently.
I live in an apartment so I wouldn't be home-charging daily, there'd be plenty of times I'd want to park my car at the first available spot in my area at 55% charge and use it the next day, which is even more restrictive.
For the entry-level Tesla the WLTP range is 530km or 70% more. There the problem is much less. And for home-chargers, it's also a no-brainer usually, especially with home solar. But for an apartment-dweller who just needs an entry-level car, it's still a toss-up between a new EV like a renault 5 for 30k, or just a Toyota Corolla Hybrid that gets great mileage, low maintenance and can be had new for 30k or a few years old for 20k.
Unfortunately, I refuse to buy a Tesla due to Musk's politics.
Why do you think the R5 was developed in China? Renault have been quite open about all the improvements they had to make to their processes, development centres and factories in France to make it. The Twingo was partially developed in China.
That sounds intuitively true, but I’m not convinced that it is actually the case. I don’t think we know enough about neural network training to say what training and how many parameters are necessary for what kind of performance on which tasks.
It's a weekly email with all the recently published software engineering conference talks. I also pick a few ones that are featured and write short TLDRs. This month, I'll should hit 10,000 readers, fingers crossed!
If I'm attentive during spec/plan creation I sort of build this "expectation" of what the actual PR will look like, the mental model of it. Then it's somewhat easier to review.
But the mental load is brutal tbh, and still not sure if it's "worth it"
> it's important to note that the Israeli government does work very hard to conflate Zionism with Judaism
This is definitely made easier by the fact that the arrogance, the endless lawyering, the shady dealings, the greediness, the constant switching between attacking and playing the victim, they all match to a tee the most known historical antisemitic tropes.
You need to draw red lines somewhere. If you wage attack wars on other countries or reject our shared values, you can't be part of Western society or enjoy its amenities. Don't do that, and you can. It's that simple.
Oh the other hand, there's been an endless parade of recent posts from other FOSS maintainers saying "we don't want your drive-by PRs": it's not hard to see people getting dissuaded from the whole dance of determining whether a project is receptive at all, then whether it has a reasonable number of hoops for outsiders to jump through.
Now, personally, when I file a bug report for a FOSS project I like to suggest an underlying cause and fix if I can figure it out, but I more rarely just submit a PR outright.
Is this for your client or company or open source?