Literally every check-in form I've been through had some required checkboxes to declare that you've packed your luggage yourself, have complete awareness of what's in there, and claim responsibility for such items. There are also countless, very visible, posters in airports saying so. Your paper trail might be useful to law enforcement in prosecuting the people who handed you the no-no stuff, but it doesn't absolve you of any responsibility.
Anecdotally, I once had an outrageously difficult time explaining to a German customs officer that the bag I placed in the scanner had items belonging to both my sister and myself. It didn't help that we were travelling together, and she was also there to back my statements up. He simply would not accept the fact that there was an electronic device (e-book) that belonged to her, in a bag that belonged to me, which we forgot to take out before the scanner.
It was possible to do the same with some PC games! I have fond memories of listening to the soundtracks of Driver, and Knights and Merchants, on my little stereo.
Yeah, X-Wing vs Tie Fighter had a lot of the popular Star Wars music in redbook audio so it would work fine in a CD player, a fact that I was super excited to find out when I was a kid playing with my action figures.
If my experience reverse engineering PHP written in Dutch is anything to go by, it means the function and variable names, comments, database columns, logs... would all be in Dutch -- or potentially worse, in Dutch but using English words. Which in turn means they sometimes won't necessarily have an accurate translation to English, in most cases a single translation at any rate, and you'd have to do a ton of disambiguation to make sense of anything.
Yes, this. I do support for programmers and regularly get examples showing problems. Occasionally these are written by non English speakers.
Obviously I understand the programming language part, but all the variables and functions are just "random strings". It's really interesting to me how much that affects my ability to read the vode and make sense of it.
Turns out when my teacher said "use meaningful variable names" that was good advice.
I'd add that if you're too lazy to do that, use pronounceable names. I have no problem with loop counters being x or y or whatever. Just don't make it gedoogenshcpekel.
Re: junior colleagues, do you not instead arrive at "why does the static analyzer complain", or worse, an avoidance of proper types that you then have to point out in review?
But after that they learn to write code which makes both the static analyzer and the reviewer happy, and such code tends to be much more maintainable down the line.
When you don't have strict typing discipline enforced by the CI, you will likely have to enforce it manually anyway because projects in a gradually typed language without simple types enforced tend to become a complete mess IMO.
There are still other reasons to print stuff, and still preferably at home often enough. Hobbies (sheet music, game material), German bureaucracy, workflow preferences. However these companies made it completely impractical to own an inkjet printer which you might not use for 6 months at a time, and for some reason they aren't milking laser printers as hard.
Though, I'm pretty sure I'd just spring for a thermal printer if they made toner maintenance impractical too, personally speaking.
> This works all the time and serves all possible cases.
Unless you want the check to be always against the initial length of your iterable, rather than its modified state, you'd have to repeat the `n = len(iterable)` inside the loop, or introduce some syntactic caramel of the walrus kind (though I'm not sure if it would work here).
I think the reaction is at least partially based on the loss of precisely that certainty: there is a sense of comfort in that no matter how unacceptable someone’s actions or ideas are to us, they will die, regardless of who they are — eventually. The thought of that eventuality becoming unusually distant in the future threatens that comfort. Doubly so when only the powerful will live longer, which will come first, everyone seems to agree.
Instead of resigning to “at least they will one day die”, wouldn’t it better to hold rich people responsible? This argument just sounds too much like in Christian theology where the “evil” are punished in the afterlife, which is just a mix of defeatism and propaganda.
Anecdotal observation from big-ish corps in EU: everyone started trying to look very mindful about what data they ask for in the first place, what gets stored where, what is shared with whom. In some cases, this led to actually being more mindful about those. At least in e-commerce, GDPR worked in the privacy-minded consumer's benefit to some extent, and not quite against anyone.
It was helpful for CA's GDPR-like law for Mozilla to find out about the whole sexual activity debacle. But it certainly didn't go far enough, because who would willingly allow a car company to collect that information? And why did such an outrageous data point not make its way to the public until Mozilla's investigations?
Anecdotally, I once had an outrageously difficult time explaining to a German customs officer that the bag I placed in the scanner had items belonging to both my sister and myself. It didn't help that we were travelling together, and she was also there to back my statements up. He simply would not accept the fact that there was an electronic device (e-book) that belonged to her, in a bag that belonged to me, which we forgot to take out before the scanner.
reply