Again, the problem seems to be who the arbiter of safety is. The police being the arbiter seems to be the problem. I don't think we disagree much. That bill carves out reasonable exemptions that become unreasonable when the police are the interpreters.
> 10-25 feet isn't reasonable for a no-filming police abuses zone. It can make it crime for someone who is handcuffed and being beaten by police from recording them.
Has that actually been interpreted by a court in that way or are you proposing a hypothetical? Your interpretation makes all dashcams illegal, which makes many Tesla and Toyota cars illegal.
The way I interpreted it was that people who are not part of a scene need to maintain some distance for safety.
---
The legality of filming police is thorny. For instance, a number of states passed laws after LivePD became a thing that barred the filming of traffic stops. That, however, contradicts the abilities of citizen journalists to document traffic stops and interactions.
Personally speaking, I don't want to be filmed during a traffic stop unless its my own footage. When I was arrested and went to jail the police posted my mug shot to every local paper and crime reporting website. It took quite a long time to scrub the internet of all of that once charges were dropped. Footage would be much worse because at one point after my head was driven into the ground I was sobbing. My instance also involved the police roughing me up because they perceived me to be "strong".
10-25 feet seems reasonable with 25 being the upper bound of reasonability. The average person can move 9-12ft/s in a single direction; starting speed would be slower so generous is 5-6ft/s. 2 seconds worth of distance sounds reasonable to keep everyone safe.
As others have pointed out the issue likely isn't the distance. It's that police can enforce their own measures here without accountability.
Sure, you all are probably right that unless I care to dig up his now deleted tweets and a recording of that conference that it's not worth saying anything about.
On the note of DORAs quality, I don't think they've ever actually released any datasets. The excuse they give is anonymity but their collection surveys always stated that the surveys are anonymous. It's impossible to determine the quality of their research beyond their own statements.
Uranium and Thorium decomposes into Radium, which themselves are found at 450m but the gas then rises through the Earths crust as it moves. I could see this kind of constant agitation releasing significantly more at least within a radius.
fwiw, I'm OP. I use it with 32GiB of RAM and a 1TB M.2 and it's been fantastic for day to day development on two HiDPI screens. The Vega-M graphics card mine came with is also on mainline Linux in terms of driver support.
He wasn't just affiliated, but I understand the frustration with the idea to some extent. Yes, it does sound reasonable because at any point in time they could've sat him down for a course correction and helped him learn. This was pretty much his brand as much as I can tell.
I really wish we'd stop mentioning DORA, which is now owned by Google. DORA employed a man who openly admitted on stage during a conference to beating someone elses child because that child had hit his daughter. He also went on numerous inappropriate rants on Twitter, one that was about a specific homeless woman and, from his perspective, how she had more privilege than some non-homeless groups. There are plenty of other reports of this type available and plenty of people doing great research.
If you're looking for an idea of whose best, I'd say ThoughtWorks is by far one of the most forward looking companies when it comes to determining future trends.
> This seems like a question that can be answered with data.
Maybe I've worked at all the wrong companies but in my experience any comp that's based on "data" will be gamed until it's meaningless. There is no "data" because reading impact data is often like reading tea leaves.
Frankly, what I think is going unsaid here is that corporate executives make a disparately large amount compared to the people who do and plan the work. While executives can make a great difference, so can a great manager or a great engineer. I wish we'd see executives as just another role, taking on different tasks rather than something substantively more valuable when it's not, especially in large orgs.
OpenGroup manages that social construct, the government stuff is just there to protect against misidentification and encroachment. The standards for Unix, Sockets, and LDAP were all transferred to OpenGroup to manage and they've done so.
I've been using systemd for a while, which I'm surmising is what you're referring to when you say controversial, and it's frankly not a diminished experience for someone that wants a consistently working desktop. The amount of things I used to have to hack into my OS were substantial, these days they're nearly nil and applications have common interfaces to plug into.
I'm not sure what, if anything, I materially gave up other than that all of those components have a contracted API now so all future components will need to adhere to that API.
Agree to an extent. Contractor relationships are abused at many companies, but this is usually the case with mid to low level positions. People who make it through senior ranks and go on to become consultants get treated very differently. The latter is also incredibly lucrative.
Not going to lie, I went into reading this was very low expectations and was pleasantly surprised. It's worth noting that mentorship in the corporate world doesn't need to depend on level, it can be a skill gap someone wants to fill.
One thing that I think I may deviate with on this article is that mentoring shouldn't be started after coding; you should really be mentoring all along the way in your career. If the first time that you mentor is when you hold the title "Senior" then you're bound to screw up in some major ways and those screw ups will be amplified because of your perceived power and position. If you're a senior and haven't mentored up until this point I'd spend a good while mentoring people of your own level before you take on juniors.
Another piece of unsolicited advice is to drop any kind of perceptively fake facades; people will very much pick up on if you're git clone --depth=1 around them. Use that time to really invest in and get to know someone, and as the article points out, let them get to know you.
My last piece of advice is be there with them through their trials, especially in the lows. I once had a Marine that was going to get the equivalent of a PIP for behavior and none of the other NCOs wanted to go to our equivalent of HR with him because they knew they'd be dressed down by a man whose very existence was validated by dressing seniors down for their reports behavior. Of course, if a senior wasn't present he'd happily give that tongue-lashing to the junior. Without missing a beat I said I'd go. The worst place you can leave someone on their dark days is alone.
Unpopular opinion: the next iteration of privacy laws needs to factor in AI. If AI is allowed to slurp up PII or derogative works and the people defending it defend it with the zeal of cryptobros then we're in for a decade of real pain in terms of both copyright law, PII, and IP exposure.