I have found that vibrating alarms on wrist watches to be very effective. For over 5 years I've been setting a vibration alarm on my watch and another backup alarm on my phone. I never slept through the vibration alarm. Granted YMMV
You don't need an HDMI port, you just need a driver to support running the right graphics calculations and producing image to funnel to another output port. The GPU may lack some features, may have an architecture that is bad for rendering, and may be suboptimal in delivering the performance per watt. Exactly like how a CPU doesn't have a display port.
I'd argue chronic conditions that are debilitating should have at least the same priority as cancer, assuming their prevalence in the general population is similar. Long covid is more like to affect productive age people compared to cancer, so a government would be wise to prioritize it.
There are secrets like passwords, but there are also secrets like "these are the parameters for running a server for our assembly line for X big corp".
For much of SP500, the largest shareholders are the passive investors. It's common that an activist hedge fund can influence decisions with a mere 3% or so stake because the likes of BlackRock and Vanguard support them or abstain.
It's possible to treat software close to a first-class citizen even technically as a cost center. Probably the key is to have a lean team that is effective and management trusts, in a business whose profit margin or stability can be greatly enhanced by good software. If you're relatively lean then nobody sane would be looking to cut fat in your team. On top of that, the attitude of management and the culture is really important, and this CEO's attitude is at least a good start.
I hear Meta Ads has one of the more toxic environments for SWEs, even though Ads make money.
You can learn to take good risks and handle hardship without taking stupid unnecessary risks. One important life lesson is that the only risks worth taking are those that offer corresponding upside - else the expected outcome is ruin. Education wise this means you give them necessary or low-impact risks to take - and let them endure outcomes such as failing a difficult but important project, failing to find love, losing a basketball match, or losing friendships. Of course, sometimes you may need to do something even if there is no upside for yourself directly, but that is outside the scope of this topic.
We obviously aren't going to achieve 0 unless we lock every kid on earth up in a padded room, which we aren't doing, so "more" or "less" is fine if the reward is worth the risk. Which is exactly the discussion being had right now.
I am not saying current US tradeoff is necessary ideal. But, when people argue by "human history" they should not ignore what actually happened during that history. Because as of now, kids ARE better off then they generally were for majority of human history.
The gooses thing was memory of my grandmother. It is not some kind of distant medieval history, it was the norm around WWII.
No one here is saying the 1880's are the goal. We're discussing if kids not going outside and messing around and getting hurt sometimes is good or bad.
I brought up "human history" as the logical extreme of the counter argument, not to argue that's the goal.
The problem with that logical extreme is that kids died a lot by our standards. They also had no protection against abuse. You had more of them due to non existent anticonception, which made their "value" go down.
It was actually both. The accident rate was significantly higher, it was just dwarfed by the other health problems so it didn’t seem so bad in comparison
In some cases the retail store just doesn't list the price and the store owner may just come up with a highly marked-up price when asked. 10x would be very rare though indeed.
What store doesn't list prices? Isn't that illegal in most places? In my country even the tiniest ancient village stores I've been to have prices listed on items (sometimes simple labels attached to the items, such as "10", but still there).
You will see 10 X but it’s in places where it’s considered emergency go to the 24 hour gas station and look at the price of diapers or butt wipes compared to Walmart.
>True for all systems, but AV updates are exempt from such policies. When there is a 0day you want those updates landing everywhere asap.
This is irrational. The risk of waiting for a few hours to test in a small environment before deploying a 0-day fix is marginal. If we assume the AV companies already spent their sweet time testing, surely most of the world can wait a few more hours on top of that.
Given this incident, it should be clear the downsides of deploying immediately at a global scale outweigh the benefits. The damage this incident caused might even be more than all the ransomware attacks combined. How long to take to do extra testing will depend on the specific organization, but I hope nobody will allow CrowdStrike trying to unilaterally impose a standard again.
There's always a queue somewhere at some level of resilience. Sometimes it's as mundane as the TCP buffer, some other times the other end points may become unresponsive for a while, including the time series DB you seem to want to take as the source of truth, or whatever that tries to resend and reconcile the requests.
