AFNobody

That is more or less correct. It is a way for state governments to enable "their side" to win easier. It will get worse as the demographic shift continues to strangle the GOP's support in swing states.

The majority of the left supports decriminalization or legalization as the other commenter pointed out.

Pretending it isn't a partisan issue is silly.

Which is the problem.

This is largely correct but not something the US's religious right is willing to accept.

Decriminalizing prostitution and criminalizing the person doing the "buying" in public is the maximum that is viable without encouraging abuse.

Unless they are a market making financial institution, yeah.

And this is why you have 3 of everything.

Three copies. Three bank accounts. Etc.

Management made demands that exceeded resources available and kept blocking my vacation to try to meet deadlines. I literally left with 100% of my vacation accumulated.

Do you genuinely believe that when many laws are written by interest groups and past with little modification?

And yes, the average race us corrupted by outrageous lies. I have literally never seen an election at any level that lacked outrageous lies by at least one of the candidates.

6 potholes is 2 miles on one road.

Technocrats lack the skill set to win elections where everyone lies outrageously.

If they had such skills, they would be common American politicians. One if the few benefits of China's collectivism is all the politicians have to share the same reality, even adjusted by party propaganda. It allows technocrats to operate effectively since they do not need to compete with outrageous liars.

It isn't the same policy anymore and it borders on dishonest to claim that it is.

The investment is no longer substantial in public R&D. Instead, it gets funnelled to investors who don't explore beyond the minimum.

I already have. lol.

You'd think that but in FL at least, there is ~6 potholes on my route to work every day that have been left there for months.

It is blocking people from converting to paying customers because as soon as we see an issue like that we know it isn't viable because we'll get denied.

And that is the requirement enforced by IT in many companies with security audits.

You clearly never worked at a large company with one-size fits all security directives such as "never store the password in plain text".

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/38066

When glaring security issues sit open for a year, you need to understand GitLab is a problem for anyone who has regular security audits.

I am not asking for 100% redirection of resources to fix all the issues. I am suggesting they reprioritize resource allocation to lean more towards fixing issues that exist instead of new feature implementation.

I am not here to push any specific ticket. I just think GitLab should move in the direction of redirecting more resources to fixing the warts as a general policy decision.

Ultimately, I am not your customer and haven't been for a couple years so it is up to you.

GitLab should, frankly, focus on performance/ux/bug-fix releases every other release. And probably for the next 2-3 releases to get some of the warts under control.

This constant push for project management features, frankly, is at the expense of the core product. I'd rather use a combination of GitHub and JIRA over Gitlab.

True, it is that too.

More population is bad for ecological reasons.

More population is vital for economic reasons.

Its two competing philosophies. (i.e. Do the financially practical things for an individual/country vs. the wisest thing for the collective species)

Depends on the workplace culture.

Some places you can't negotiate down to 40 hours a week. Those places you quit.

Yup and if it turns out there are advantages to transition it into a real project.

HSTS depends on DNS and NTP.

If a hostile controls a DNS server, you are hosed anyway.

It is really just an acknowledgement that buybacks are more tax efficient dividends. So now "value" companies, instead of paying dividends, perform stock buybacks.

It is a tax efficiency thing, nothing more.

I wasn't discouraging milk products, sorry.

I'm not really a pure "Paleo" type. I get all my fat from whole milk, the one-a-day meat dish, cheese, yogurt, and oil/butter I use to cook stuff with. One curry + vegetable dish, for instance, is like 25% of your expected fat consumption.

I eat less fat and sugar than a normal American but I still have a couple ounces of fat with every meal. I probably eat about 80% of the recommended about of fat. To me, the thing most fail to notice is how much fat they add to their cooking.

Yes. He was asking how to be unbiased about self evaluation. You have to paint really broad strokes to do that.

Is it perfect? No.

Do I think the 70% of programmers that probably fit this definition are mediocre? Yeah.

Keep in mind I am calling myself a mediocre programmer.

If you don't:

A) Massively outperform compared to your peers.

B) Massively underperform compared to your peers.

You are almost certainly a mediocre programmer.

If you are in the B category, it is usually pretty obvious to _everyone_ and you've probably seen your performance reviews at _multiple_ employers be below average.

If you massively outperform your peers, you probably find your boss at _multiple_ employers going out of his way to retain you. (i.e. Massive salary bumps, bonuses, promotions, etc.)

If neither of these are true, you are almost certainly mediocre.

For instance, I made a really stupid decision for personal reasons to leave a job where I massively outperformed my peers (my boss was really bad at hiring people) and received a 30k raise a couple years before I left. But, realistically, that was the _only_ job I had that kind of outsized performance and it was more to do with my boss's skill at hiring people than my skill as a developer.

At my jobs before and after that one, I've fell safely in the mediocre range. Never been fired, never had a PIP, and generally got "Meets expectations-ish" performance reviews.

At my current job, I underperform my peers but that is largely because I'm their first hire in ~3 years. I have alot of catching up to do as a result, and I've been there ~90 days.

Unsurprisingly, when the financial incentive is don't do X people prefer not to do X.

The truth is, we need to socialize the cost of child care and having children. Or we need immigration.

The latter has always been the cheaper (for society) option but given all the resentment that has built up in the US, we are probably better off going with the former.