The main problem I run into with git is communicating with my teams about editing history and how they shouldn't.
Particularly on teams that like to keep main clean and avoid reverts and merge commits in favor of rebasing. Thankfully my current team likes to keep their PRs clean and main is whatever works.
That and merge conflicts, especially on a stale branch. I use cli for most things and Intellij's merge tool for merge conflicts because I can get a clear view of what's what.
Police already publish arrest records, mug shots, and they're covered by the media as well. Criminal charges are public records and covered by FOIA requests.
"Tū quoque (/tjuːˈkwoʊkwi, tuːˈkwoʊkweɪ/; Latin for "you also"), or the appeal to hypocrisy, is an informal fallacy that intends to discredit the opponent's argument by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with its conclusion(s)." - Wikipedia
That document is widely misread. It's true that the bank doesn't have to wait around for a saver to make a loan (they can borrow from other banks), but at the same time banks do fund most of their loans through deposits. Look at the balance sheet for any commercial bank, and you will see most of their liabilities are in the form of deposits.
Colleague #437: "So whoever first set this up has left, so I'll just follow the documentation they left to figure out what they did... Oh. ...eh, I got a deadline."
A VPN isn't itself secure. It's only a secure tunnel. If the VPN's exit is insecure, then you're insecure. DNS-Over-HTTPS hasn't reached ubiquity yet but VPNs are very useful but are having a reckoning with serverside attacks and governments demanding "oversight" and backdoors (like the recent move by China on foreign owned but China-located companies VPN usage).
At my work we almost encourage the blog post in there idea.
It's not a hard and fast rule and it's ok to ignore it when it makes sense. But we also don't mind if your commit message takes longer to write than the code took to change and debug.
A lot of context is assumed in commits, and almost all of it is temporal. Capturing as much of that as possible pays off down the line.
Commit in the article is a good example where the context explains much more than the change.
(On the flip side, the pay off has an expiry date so I'm not extremely fussed when people lax, but it's still good to check in basic assumptions whith your code)
The CEO of SpaceX did commit a couple crimes in the same podcast.
Uber's autonomous car fatally collided with a woman, raising questions of negligence and liability in automation.
Uber acquired some of Alphabet/Waymo's trade secrets when they aqui-hired one of their former engineers who apparently kept a bunch of Waymo's IP he worked on. That engineer himself is now facing a federal indictment, and Uber and Waymo have settled.
E-scooters are facilitating a number of city-specific crimes (it's usually illegal to operate a vehicle, bike, or skate on a city sidewalk and the e-scooters do not provide helmets but neither do the riders). To say nothing of the legally dubious use of public property to deploy them.
I guess I'm not sure what Musk smoking pot on Joe Rogan has to do with SpaceX's unquestionable success in a market dominated practically since its inception by pork-armored incumbents.
Are you talking about the Joe Rogan podcast? It's recorded/filmed from California, where marijuana is legal recreationaly, and had been at the time of the original broadcast.
Particularly on teams that like to keep main clean and avoid reverts and merge commits in favor of rebasing. Thankfully my current team likes to keep their PRs clean and main is whatever works.
That and merge conflicts, especially on a stale branch. I use cli for most things and Intellij's merge tool for merge conflicts because I can get a clear view of what's what.