even those who post constantly are more aware than people just a few years ago about how much information the internet is absorbing about us.
I'm about 10 years older than the author, and we were aware. The Cambridge Analytica scandal is just the straw that broke the Camel's back. That was Facebook's MO all the way back circa 2010. It was just that most of us teenagers at the time simply didn't care. The adults warned us the same way they warn teens today but for the most part they didn't care about the data mining back then either.
I've been programming for years and I've had a GitHub account for about as long. Almost every piece of code I've ever written that wasn't for an employer or a school assignment has gone into a public GitHub repository. It goes online because that's what I do. It's the easiest way for me to share code with friends and others, to manage it across multiple machines, etc. There's no reason to put it in a private repository, especially if I'm sticking an open source license with a disclaimer like this attached:
THERE IS NO WARRANTY FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES PROVIDE THE PROGRAM “AS IS” WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.
That's well and good, but the thing people seem to keep missing is that git != github. Github is first and foremost a social network. You may keep your personal projects there, but they are still public and on a social network, and that means anyone who reads them will judge them.
The question before us is, how do recruiters judge them?, and the answer one has given is he or she looks at style and clarity in code. Others have come back responding that's not fair or relevant, but that's the reality of putting things into the public sphere; you are judged whether you like it or not on terms that you don't get to dictate.
Look at it this way: when you go out and about to meet someone, you might get all gussied up to present yourself in the best way. But when you go to the grocery store, you might not have done your hair and makeup, maybe you might be wearing day old sweat pants. If someone catches your eye at the grocery store when you're looking like a slob, your chances don't improve just because you put your best foot forward last week at the club.
It usually takes a lot of work to get a person to judge your work. Typically if you make a repository public, no one will give a shit. It takes a lot of advertising to produce any interest.
I have a repository with 4500 stars, and hundreds of thousands of visitors. Not one person has ever commented on the quality of my code, but many people contribute. Back when I had 100-200 stars, potential employers were impressed by the popularity and rarely commented on the code either. When I got any comments at all, it would be questions like why did I decide to do something one way and not another. No judgment there either.
Bottom line: nobody will ever judge your code if it's public, unless you work very very hard for it.
If you have a project that you didn't care enough to write cleanly, or even document in the most bare minimum of ways (a helpful README to contextualize the code) then why are you even putting it online?
If I put it online for a different intended audience then the question "how do recruiters judge them?" is beside the point.
I am well aware of the difference between git and GitHub. I alluded to some projects that I don't put on GitHub. Let me be explicit in stating that just because the project isn't on GitHub doesn't mean that I don't keep it in a git repository (or other version control, for certain employers). This has nothing to do with confusing git and GitHub.
I don't understand why Microsoft would acquire Canonical. Microsoft already has an operating systems business in Windows. I don't see any obvious synergies with other lines of business except Azure.
Azure officially supports a number of distributions. The risk of alienating the existing partners who package these distributions for Azure likely outweighs the small benefit Microsoft would get from acquiring Canonical. A deep partnership already exists (e.g. Ubuntu Advantage integration throughout Azure). They don't need to own Canonical for that.
> Microsoft already has an operating systems business in Windows.
Windows the OS is gonna die sooner or later, it's a question of time. Windows the legacy application API layer is probably gonna stick around forever.
Linux kernel + proprietary Windows application compatibility secret sauce seems like a killer combination. (Think Wine, except easy to use and actually working, and commercial.)
I think the only thing stopping Microsoft from following this plan is legacy devs and managers having a vested interest to keep their jobs around.
The Windows API may be old and rotting, but NT is a very modern kernel compared to Linux. It would make as much sense for them to support Linux binaries on Windows. Oh wait, they do ;). I think Microsoft would make quite a splash if they open source the NT kernel. They could even follow Apple's model, where they open up most of the kernel and keep win32 et al. proprietary.
I don't think Windows will die anytime soon. Yes, the traditional Windows desktop will die eventually. This is why Microsoft probably makes such a strong play with Azure and Office 365. But Microsoft can just continue to sell Windows + Blink-based Edge as a modern desktop for web apps that also has support for legacy win32 applications for those companies and individuals that need it.
Building a compat layer on top of Linux seems to make little sense. It will be a huge time investment and while desktop Linux is great for developers, the whole ecosystem is to volatile for most end users. Plus the Linux graphics stack is still not where it needs to be.
Whether they'll acquire a Linux distributor is a completely separate question for me. I think it makes sense to acquire know-how and some influence for Linux on Azure. On the other hand, maybe they don't want to upset other Linux vendors. Oracle, Red Hat, and SUSE are typically used on expensive SAP/Oracle deployments. In fact, they were even SUSE resellers one day ;) [1].
If you're going to keep the Windows API then why would you replace the NT kernel from under it when it is, in many ways, better than the Linux kernel? What's more likely is that Microsoft buys Canonical so they can initiate the extend part of the EEE strategy with Subsystem for Linux.
Canonical would be a target mainly because of most - if not all cloud products - primarily run on Ubuntu.
Cloud Native products literally do not care for RHEL/SuSE and the like for a rather large portion but just give you Ubuntu. Also, paid support is given in combo with Ubuntu. Paid support: big business.
I'm mostly concerned about the ammonia used during the process. The ammonia is used to kill off germs due to contamination. Maybe we should just throw away contaminated animal by-product.
No need for concern. High estimates for ammonia residues in LFTB are around 400 ppm. A healthy serving will net you tens of milligrams of extra ammonia. In scientific terms that's approximately jack shit. Your body gets rid of many times that amount every time you urinate. A lot more if you're athletic or eat a high protein diet.
The intentional mislabeling bothers me most, but yeah I'm not so fond of ammonia.
In the human body, ammonia is a lot like alcohol and carbon dioxide: it is a poison that we are well-equipped to remove.
Well, sort of. Just as people with lung trouble have problems removing carbon dioxide, people with kidney trouble have problems removing ammonia. What about people with kidney trouble? Perhaps they deserve a warning label.
As a vegetarian myself, I wouldn't dare make excuses for the beef industry, but your argument here is pretty fucking weak. At the high end, LFTB contains about as much ammonia as a lot of commercial bread, and about half of what's in hard cheese. The increase this causes in your body is just noise compared to what comes from your natural protein metabolism. Google for "lftb ammonia ppm" for some numbers.
So no, please, let's not start slapping ammonia warnings on all of our food.
If by "modern internet", you mean TCP/IP, then no. You'd need a circuit-switched network to do that, and those are all obscure/niche networks except for the Public Switched Telephone Network.
FATCA comes into play when you have a bank account and primarily when it has over $10,000 in it
If you dont have a BANK ACCOUNT and with national currency or securities in it, then there is no FATCA
Hm if that wasnt clear, stablecoins/crypto are exempt. Several stablecoins are FDIC insured according to the issuer. Form a US company just to access the international banking system and put a title on rent and pay for a github account. Let your international company just use crypto.
There are typically laws that deem a company to be related to a person if that person and their (natural) relatives own some threshold percentage of that company.
It is probably similar to the police seizing your keys or combinations for locks to a storage unit and you changing the lock on the storage unit.
The police can just go to google or slack with a warrant to get the evidence. The physical equivalent would be going to the storage unit proprietor and cutting the lock.
IANAL but I would expect it to count as "hindering a police investigation", obstruction of justice, or something similar.
I'm about 10 years older than the author, and we were aware. The Cambridge Analytica scandal is just the straw that broke the Camel's back. That was Facebook's MO all the way back circa 2010. It was just that most of us teenagers at the time simply didn't care. The adults warned us the same way they warn teens today but for the most part they didn't care about the data mining back then either.