Lord Jesus F Christ. The author writes a complete electronics book and gives it away for free, and your entitled rectum moans about having to type $0 to get it for free?
I'll give Typescript yet another go. I really like it and wish I could use it. It's just that any project I start, inevitably the sourcemap chain will go wrong and I lose the ability to run the debugger in any meaningful way.
This is exactly like when you're teaching a new game to a group and you play an "open test round" - cards up and everyone can see all card/secrets and the sole purpose is for everyone to learn the game.
Wow, thanks! I'm only partially in but I do recommend reading it. It's quite readable.
>Mr Padgett then made the remarkable assertions that this was a “fairly minor display
issue” and that the Claimant “had not been negatively impacted and was in fact paid
out the correct amount as determined by the RNG and in line with Paddy Power’s
terms and conditions.”
>Stopping here, despite the absence of a witness statement
from the Claimant, I do not accept those assertions by Mr Padgett. £1 million is a life
changing sum for the vast majority of people in England and Wales. It could abolish
debts, feed families, buy houses, pay for private medical care and many other vital
matters in life. I infer that, like the majority of the population, the Claimant hoped and
maybe dreamed of winning over £1 million. So, when she did so, on 18.10.2020, and
when that sum was then taken away from her, that cannot properly or fairly be
characterised as a “fairly minor display issue” and it is wrong to assert that the
Claimant has “not been negatively impacted”.
Also:
>Mr Padgett admitted that 13 other consumers had been affected by the same
mislabelling between the 1st of September and the 18th of October 2020 and he listed
the dates upon which those events occurred. What he did not do was list the vice versa
errors, namely where consumers were shown they had won the Daily Jackpot but in
had in fact won the Monster Jackpot according to the RNGS and no evidence was
provided at all about the vice versa errors, if any. Nor did he inform the Court about
what the Defendant had done in relation to each of those consumers’ wins.
I feel like there are details missing. What happened to those who "really" won the jackpot according to the random number generator? What did the UI show then? Did everyone who won the smaller jackpot actually win the big jackpot? What are the technical details of the glitch?
Based on this incomplete information I'd say a total audit of the system should be carried out.
It's so strange, you read the material and sometimes you either struggle with understanding or even don't see how it's relevant and not just a waste of time.
Then when you review it much later, it's like opening a new room of knowledge, it just makes sense and it makes me so happy in a strange way.
I've had this happen often with music theory. Music theory it pretty dull on it's own and small gaps in knowledge excludes you from understanding a lot more.
A few yeas ago my friend had his iphone replaced three times under warranty. Every single time the mic failed and it came up with a message after boot that an audio device had failed. His next phone was an Android one.
It's very interesting how many "non-trivial" things can go wrong with power tools. Kickbacks for example. They sound very trivial when you know about them. But to the layman that does a one off cut with a table saw, circular saw, chain saw, angle grinder, ... it's not so intuitive.
One might say and be very careful but then a kickback shows up and causes brown pants at best, a life changing injury or death at worst.