My answer is also every industry. It's like asking what industry could benefit from collaboration.
Today, I was on a networking event for an industry that is currently heavily looking to adopt open-source collaboration, due to cost pressure. And it was such a surreal experience.
You had dozens of human beings in this room, who all understood that collaboration is good. Who understood that the shared goal of surviving as an industry requires collaboration. Who understood each other as human beings.
But because they collect their paychecks from different companies, you had these stupid infights of "our product is better", as well as monetization always being prioritized higher than collaboration success.It did not feel like we were working on a shared goal, and rather like each company was just trying to sell their product. Rather than one solution, there were as many solutions as there were companies, each one pitching their solution as the one solution everyone else should agree on.
Yeah, I don't know what the moral of the story is. It just felt so incredibly stupid.
Yeah, I agree that there could probably be a way to "close" Activities, which doesn't do the session management, so explicitly just throws the windows onto another Activity (or maybe prompts you when there's still windows on that Activity), without having to outright delete that Activity.
Deleting an Activity is relatively disruptive, since you may have files linked to it or nicely setup wallpapers and such. And there are a number of places where Activities show up, where it can be annoying to have Activities showing up that you're not currently using.
I can imagine them being open to that suggestion, if you articulate it well.From what I saw, they did make a lot of changes to remove the start/stop functionality, but most of it was session handling code. So, it might not be too additional much trouble to add a way to close Activities instead.
As a wise Nate Graham once said: The most reliable way to find out whether people use a feature (and how they use it) is to remove it. The second-most reliable way is to announce its removal.Well, you did miss the announcement, so it probably felt a bit rude to you, but yeah, you should still consider this the start of a conversation. They're not hellbent on removing this feature.
Naja, i.d.R. ist es schon möglich das zumindest ein bisschen zu verbessern. Manchmal findet man auch ganz andere Produktionsverfahren, die wesentlich bessere Zuverlässigkeit mitbringen.
Aber eine pauschale Aussage ist da echt schwierig. Unterschiedliche Bauteile haben unterschiedliche Fehlertoleranzen. Und manchmal hat man schon Unsummen in eine Verbesserung der Produktionszuverlässigkeit gesteckt, aber hängt immernoch bei 80% Wegwerfquote, einfach weil es da kein gutes Produktionsverfahren gibt und das bestehende nicht mehr großartig optimiert werden kann.
Da muss man auch dazusagen, dass die Rechnung eigentlich nur pro Bauteil so simpel ist, oder wenn das Gesamtprodukt in einem einzelnen maschinellen Schritt hergestellt wird.
Also bei Uhren ist wahrscheinlich der Ausschuss pro Bauteil nochmal wesentlich höher als 80%, aber man muss nicht die gesamte Uhr wegwerfen, sondern man pickt sich eben die guten Teile raus.Spätestens bei der Endmontage fällt dann auf, wenn ein Zahnrädchen um einen Viertelsmillimeter unrund ist und deswegen nicht in die Uhr eingebaut werden kann. Dann nimmt man eben das nächste Zahnrädchen.
The thing I never understood about PowerShell is that it's partially more verbose than C#, which is one of the most verbose programming languages in existence. It just feels like you might as well go for a full-fledged programming language at that point.
The appeal of Bash et al is that the scripting is almost the same as the interactive usage, which you already know. But because PowerShell is so verbose, I'm really not sure people do use it interactively.
I guess, that code snippet in the article makes somewhat of a difference, in that PowerShell offers better features for interop between processes. But man, that still feels like it could've been a library instead...
Ich denke mir ja immernoch, wenn ich irgendwann mal mit meinen drölfzig jetzigen Nebenprojekten durch bin (nie), dann bastle ich einen Meme-Generator, wo man ein Meme per Textkonfiguration oder CLI beschreibt.
Diese Meme ist ja im Grunde, wie dein Post-Text gut zusammenfasst, eigentlich auch nur Text + Überraschte Donnerratte...
Yeah, most errors occur somewhere in a library that you use (because libraries typically do the actual heavy lifting) and in the vast majority of cases, it will give you a (English) string describing what went wrong.
If you can just slap that string into the final error message (or at least into logging), that is so much easier and more helpful than pretending you could possibly assign an error code to each such error case.
Damn, are you me? I haven't bothered with fading out the back yet, but I also cut 12mm on top, 9mm for the rest.
Personally, I found that when I lean my head back, then there's a pretty noticeable bend where my neck starts. And when my hair crosses that line, it looks bad. So, that's where I create the border.And I just basically grab the back of my skull and move my hand down until it meets that bend to the neck, then I cut along the index finger.I feel like I'd probably create the fade above that, too, but your mileage may vary, of course.
Yeah, I also recommend this. Particularly with laptops, it's good to have a full-fledged desktop environment, since you're more likely to need WiFi, power management, easy display configuration etc..
I'm saying spray-mop the floor once a week and you'll take most of the dust out of that room before it settles on harder-to-clean surfaces, which reduces how often you need to clean shelves, plants etc..
Most dust in a typical household is from shed skin cells, from either humans or pets. And I do imagine that most shed skin cells just fall onto the floor at first and can be collected there.
My answer is also every industry. It's like asking what industry could benefit from collaboration.
Today, I was on a networking event for an industry that is currently heavily looking to adopt open-source collaboration, due to cost pressure. And it was such a surreal experience.
You had dozens of human beings in this room, who all understood that collaboration is good. Who understood that the shared goal of surviving as an industry requires collaboration. Who understood each other as human beings.
But because they collect their paychecks from different companies, you had these stupid infights of "our product is better", as well as monetization always being prioritized higher than collaboration success.It did not feel like we were working on a shared goal, and rather like each company was just trying to sell their product. Rather than one solution, there were as many solutions as there were companies, each one pitching their solution as the one solution everyone else should agree on.
Yeah, I don't know what the moral of the story is. It just felt so incredibly stupid.