While the purposivism approach has its own problems, it does seem to avoid a lot of shenanigans of the form "Well you didn't say we couldn't sell ground up orphans as soup."
There should be space for companies and people to make honest mistakes or misunderstandings and not get punished too harshly for it, but when a company like apple has their lawyers go over legal texts with a fine tooth comb to look for a single sentence that could be possibly interpreted in their advantage, knowing full well they are circumventing the intent of the law by doing so, I don't see an issue with telling them in no uncertain terms to knock it off.
"Ada is more productive than contemporary languages" is a much narrower statement than the implied "static typing is always more productive and correct than dynamic typing"
> Honest question: have there been actual European citizens who have security concerns about digital payments
God yes. Constantly. Interacting with U.S. companies is almost without exception awful. Paypal will steal your money for the slightest infraction of their puritanical senses. Uber eats will sometimes just not deliver and not even have a phone number you can call to complain. Trying to pay online with a credit card will constantly lead to your credit card details getting into criminal hands.
I'm not saying EU companies are all amazing, but at least with those you can generally expect them to not be mustache-twirling levels of terrible to their customers and if they are you've got the law on your side.
I try to steer clear of dealing with U.S. companies directly whenever possible, and the fact that for basically any international transaction I have to worries me a lot. If trump gets another one of his fits he can cripple EU payments on a whim. That's not a good thing.
It should be mentioned that within the python community using __ for extra private is widely seen as a misfeature that shouldn't've been added and shouldn't be used.
I feel like building a house and programming are the only kinds of engineering where the customer can change the project halfway through and not get laughed out the room
erh, the option with the house, sounds rather expensive?
my day-to-day work regards professional building cost estimation software, and I would claim people try to do a lot of work to avoid having to do that.
I'm not saying they don't sometimes end up doing it anyway, but in my perspective, the larger the scale, the more this is aggressively avoided as much as possible.
Similarly, I encounter a lot of comparisons where "we" software people are told to be either more or less like the building people.
What I do see though, is that building people perpetually tend to miss out on a lot of data optimisations / pipelines in the building project flow. They keep talking about wanting to do this, but in practice end up entering a lot of data from scratch multiple times. One of the culprits I see, is that the people who should have shaped the data for this, have no economic motive to do so - "why should we do that, it will only be a problem for X other people at a later stage we are not involved in".
I'm not sure if complaining about using a jaunty font on a WWII death row cell door explaining how many Jews passed through that cell is elitist at all. Real example. Using comic sans there is tone deaf at best.
Of course comic sans specifically has turned into a bit of a meme so now you'll see all sorts of people complaining about it getting used anywhere, which is a lot sillier, but still not elitist I don't think.
Quite literally oil companies do. They have a habbit of constantly trying to undercut anything that might affect their sales.
reply