One thing we can do to slightly mitigate this as devs is to use Firefox ourselves while working on our job's front-end. Even if the company doesn't prioritize Firefox, we can make sure it works in the browser while doing our normal job.
This is what I've been "accidentally" doing throughout my career, not even thinking about helping Firefox support but just because I actually prefer to use Firefox myself.
And it's not even extra work because nowadays the feature support in Firefox and Chrome is nearly identical and all the mainstream front-end libraries already support both browsers. In fact, I only remember 2 times in the last 5 years when I found bugs caused by inconsistent browser behaviours and both were quick and easy to amend in the same PR; no ticket nor discussions on prioritization were even needed.
The article mentions that Charlie (Bird) Parker's music is now public domain in most of the world (life + 70 years), but most of his records are collaborations with other artists like Dizzy Gillespie who died much later, less than 50 years ago. I also wonder if that even matters if the records are owned by corporations.
In those cases, how would I know if a record is public domain or not?
> The TH3 test harness is a set of proprietary tests [...]
> The dbsqlfuzz engine is a proprietary fuzz tester.
It's interesting that an open-source (actually public domain) software uses some proprietary tests. It never occurred to me that this was a possibility, though in retrospective it's obviously possible as long as the tests are not part of the release.
Could this be an alternative business model for "almost-open-source" projects? Similar to open-core, but in this case the project would easy to copy (open features), hard to modify (closed tests).
In the form of "creerse" it can also mean "believe in yourself" which used to have the same connotation of being mistakenly overconfident, although in the last couple of years I've started to see more "debes de creértela" Linkedin memes which have the opposite (true belief) connotation, more like "fake it till you make it".
If anyone's confused, don't worry. This verb always means "believe", the only difference is in the subtle connotations but they never affect the actual meaning.
Intuitively, I agree with the thesis. But the example for Spanish confuses me. One of the illustrations says:
"Absence of negatively biased mental verbs in English slows down the development of Theory of Mind. Children acquiring Spanish (which has verbs indicating false belief) have better performance in false-belief tasks."
But as a Spanish speaker I don't know what verbs is this referring to. On top of my head I can only think of the word "disbelieve" which doesn't have an exact, single word translation, but that's the opposite of what the quote seems to imply. Other verbs like deceive, doubt, misunderstand or imagine do have matching translations in both languages. What am I missing here?
It's true that learning an alphabet shouldn't take as long as learning the entire language. However, there's still a difference with cuneiform:
All of the examples you mentioned are derivatives of the Phoenician alphabet, which have around 20 to 30 characters each. Even with case sensitiveness and diacritics, I think they still add up to under a hundred characters.
Cuneiform character sets are in the order of magnitude of the several hundreds or even thousands, depending on the language[1], so I imagine that the experience is closer to learning to read Chinese or Japanese and less like Hebrew and Greek.
That being said, I've never tried to learn neither cuneiform or hanzi, so I'm just guessing based on the number of characters.
I just read "I've locked myself out of my digital life"[1] and it explains a concern that I have and sometimes struggle to explain.
> In the boring analogue world - I am pretty sure that I'd be able to convince a human that I am who I say I am. And, thus, get access to my accounts. I may have to go to court to force a company to give me access back, but it is possible.
> But when things are secured by an unassailable algorithm - I am out of luck. No amount of pleading will let me without the correct credentials. The company which provides my password manager simply doesn't have access to my passwords. There is no-one to convince. Code is law.
Everyone should understand this problem before they advocate to remove the in-person version of a process. The article's example sounds unlikely at first, but the same consequences can happen with any natural disaster or a robbery.
> F-Droid is different. It distributes apps that have been validated to work for the user’s interests, rather than for the interests of the app’s distributors.
F-Droid's curation saved me at least once when I wanted to upgrade my Simple™ apps and couldn't find them in F-Droid anymore, which led me to learn that SimpleMobileTools was sold to a company that closed sourced the apps[1] and that there's a free fork called Fossify[2].
Had I installed these through Google Play, they wouldn't have cared about this particular change and I would've gotten whatever random upgrades the new owners pushed.
Each app store's policies have their pros and cons, but that's why it's so important to have a diversity of marketplaces.
Yes, Kraftwerk and Tangerine Dream are mentioned under "Krautrock", as it's usually the case with music databases that lump every 1970's German "progressive" music under the same genre.
I'm glad that the "new" (post-Flash) version keeps some of the sarcasm from before, even if he toned down the level of spite that he had against some subgenres.
There's too many websites trying to be neutral and respectful, which is great, but humanity also needs subjective, opinionated rants about music. After all, music wouldn't even exist without the emotions that it inspires, an that includes negative emotions from boredom to mockery. Also, that's what makes this website fun to read in the first place.
The article has a paywall for me and I was curious about their methodology. Fortunately, Wikipedia has some information:
"Nationally representative samples of respondents are asked to think of a ladder, with the best possible life for them being a 10, and the worst possible life being a 0. They are then asked to rate their own current lives on that 0 to 10 scale."
I assume that they mean sending either a direct Linkedin message or an email to the recruiter or hiring manager.
When I was recently unemployed I started doing that after months of getting ignored by most companies and, in my experience, the only difference is that I got far more acks ("Hi! Sure, I'll take a look at your resume and reach out!") but I got a similar rate of applications-to-interview compared to applying through the official platforms.
I'm surprised with how most of the people that felt worse after the conversation seem to be paired with someone that felt better after the same conversation. I would expect any negative feelings to be reciprocal so I wonder what happened in these interactions...
Does it? It doesn't seem reasonable to me to effectively ban a non-criminal citizen from the economy and from civic life, not even for "just" six months, no matter how "irresponsible" the citizen is.
Some banks require an app for pretty much everything other than retrieving cash from an ATM, because they don't have a web app anymore:
1. Transfer money to another account. The alternative is to waste half a PTO to go to the actual bank (because they only open at working hours) to make that transfer.
2. Make an online payment. Most new cards no longer have a CVV (3 digit code) and instead require you to use the app to get a dynamic number. Many banks do not offer that option in their web app.
3. Forced 2fa for in-person payments with your card.
Today it's still possible to workaround many of these issues but they're closing these workarounds little by little.
The most important advice for people in this situation, from the article:
> I’d say my overarching advice, based on how difficult tech recruitment is right now, is to sadly play along. But — and I cannot stress this enough — make sure you document everything.
> What I mean by that is every single time AI tools cause problems, slow-downs and other disappointing outcomes, document that outcome and who was responsible for that decision. Make sure you document your opposition and professional advice too.
Personally, I would just add a warning to be careful to blame the tool, not the person. Otherwise, you will be seen as the "bad" person in the story even if your report is technically correct.
The border is a river. But rivers slightly change their course over time.
Croatia claims their original pre-Yugoslavia border, based on the historical course of the river. That's because some of its municipalities follow that old line. Serbia, on the other hand, claims that the current course of the river is the border.
The unclaimed land loophole happens because the curves of the old and new rivers intersect in a zigzag (or DNA-like) manner, so some pieces of land are claimed by both and some pieces are claimed by neither. The lands claimed by both have more value than the lands claimed by neither so neither country takes over those tiny, unpopulated strips of land because doing so would implicitly accept the other country's border claim and therefore serve as a surrender of the better lands to the other country.
I didn't know about this 2 settings but they were already disabled in my about:config. I wonder if Debian distributes a non-default about:config with Firefox.
This is what I've been "accidentally" doing throughout my career, not even thinking about helping Firefox support but just because I actually prefer to use Firefox myself.
And it's not even extra work because nowadays the feature support in Firefox and Chrome is nearly identical and all the mainstream front-end libraries already support both browsers. In fact, I only remember 2 times in the last 5 years when I found bugs caused by inconsistent browser behaviours and both were quick and easy to amend in the same PR; no ticket nor discussions on prioritization were even needed.