QOI: Lossless Image Compression in O(n) Time
1034 points • 285 comments
Recent @Ragnarork Activity
QOI: Lossless Image Compression in O(n) Time
1034 points • 285 comments
I personally think on the contrary that the French overspends too much and get kinda milked by big IT companies such as Thales that bank on the fact that no-one on the administration side can evaluate how much the work they're requesting actually costs.
> The french state is constantly broke
I'm curious as to why you'd say that and generalize for contractor work. Just as an example, Thales has landed multiple (and sometimes in a shady manner it seems) juicy contracts with the french government. Just looking it up quickly, you can find a 263 millions euros contract for radios for example. 
Mismanaged, I wouldn't argue, but it sure spends a lot and is definitely not broke.
. (in French) https://www.tradingsat.com/thales-FR0000121329/actualites/th...
> you go to FAANG or one of the numerous startups. In Europe, you go where?
* In startups.
* In FAANG offices (they have offices in Europe).
* In other software development companies which are neither of the above, but are still numerous in Europe.
To say Software development in Europe is mostly internal enterprise software development is blatantly wrong. I'm in no way saying the job market and domain topology is the same, because it definitely isn't, but this is an incredibly inaccurate take about the software market in Europe.
> Media literacy classes have already been shown to turn some percentage of kids into nazis
Quite a claim. Where has this been shown?
While I'm opposed to this legislation, how is it "always the EU" exactly? As opposed to what, the US or the rest of the world always getting it right or not passing moronic laws and regulations?
Have the US already forgotten who's at the helm of the FCC for example?
I also suspect there's a lot of hate for GDPR, even though it was a mostly good thing. It's just extremely poorly implemented by websites, and sure there are loopholes that should be plugged (the """legitimate interest"""), but it was a good first step which I'd like to see be developed further and enforced more systematically.
> they are telling the government that government regulation isn't needed — they can regulate themselves
Quite a "trustworthy" regulation entity, which helped brokers remove evidence of financial misconducts and blocked public scrutiny into that matter.
I have close to zero confidence in the finance industry being able to regulate itself.
Even for a fluff piece, this clears a relatively simple yet efficient bar: get the impressions of the photographer, bring in an expert's take to explain the science behind it, and that's it.
Note that apparently the expert didn't need to mention the words "fata morgana" either, so maybe that's a stupid focus point after all which just sounds like elitism at this point.
I know who here "pretends to tell us about the world" and it's not the journalist.
If this is your metric for how the world is doing, then it's fine.
Of course we know it isn't, but this right here is absolutely not a core issue with it.
I still think it's wrong to conflate the two, at the very least.
Agile gives you principles as to how to envision developing software. Scrum is just one implementation that tries to follow these principles.
I'm not a fan of Scrum, although I can understand why some of its components could be attractive. Velocity for example is interesting, as it's an attempt to empirically measure how "fast" a team can develop, and base estimations on that instead of just throwing a bunch of hours/days as an estimate when in fact it's hard to do that. I still think it doesn't work well to solve this, but to be fair I don't think there's a single method that solves it.
In the end, I think Agile is beneficial (in my experience!) but more importantly that you need to use and tailor a software development methods to your own needs and context, and stop blindly following existing models but instead see them just as what they are: tools.
As another example since you mentioned it: daily standups can be good, or terrible, it depends what you make of these. I've worked in a company where it was basically a "scheduled waste of time", but I moved to a place where we mixed it with basically a "hey good morning" type of coffee break and it worked rather well in a casual way, chatting up what was coming and that's it. And we keep in mind that if some kind of "ritual" becomes useless, then we skip it altogether as soon as we agree there's no value in it.
That last part feels important to me because that's ultimately where a key aspect lie: when you say it's a "micromanagers' dream", I think it just shows that the software development method can always be twisted and hijacked by some people given enough power/representation/influence.
The idea looks interesting, but a couple things of note that make me kinda wary:
- $0.75/min is $45/h and it's awfully cheap for what's ultimately consulting work
- 1 free minute in each call, call ends if no payment source is connected: what about people that would keep getting those one minutes? I know it's not much, but for some problem it might be enough if not to solve it, at least to get input that could lead to resolution.
I still like the idea because I feel strongly about stackoverflow pushing for solving everyone's issue instead of someone's, which often end up solving barely anyone problem as solutions provided are way too generic. The added effect is also that the community has devolved into a hot mess that will close so many questions as dupes even when they're not.
Sorry you had to deal with this bullshit.
The way some people feel they are entitled to demand stuff off of hobbyist open-source project maintainers is absolutely infuriating.
Given that software engineering is part of aerospace engineering, some of it is part of that engineering success.
But a key aspect of this is that one does not develop software for airplanes the same way and with the same constraints/goals as other areas of software engineering.
If anything, aerospace engineering is a prime example of how software can be made more reliable by tolerating failures instead of relying on it not to fail, to come back to GP's point about failure-tolerant designs.
Which is in itself a meta-answer to the question.
> the dominant political narrative
Funny, I thought the dominant political narrative was that terrorism is bad.
> It seems clear to me that these are people who are unwilling to sacrifice some of the money they earn to follow their ideals and principles, so they are trying this instead.
So you missed the part of the article that explained they will commit a portion of their salary to fund the union?
They are working for a company known to hire union-busters, fire employees trying to unionize or point out issues, and you want to argue that this is the safe way to try to follow their ideals and principles? This doesn't make much sense.
One could argue it's wrong to do multiple declarations like that, and the whole argument collapses to mostly a matter of preference.
I'm in the same boat, and I'd like to add that I agree that using `int* p, * q, * r;` is not pretty, and could possibly lead to ending up mistakenly with `int* p, q, r;`.
But we're in 2020 and we've learned to avoid to declaring stuff without initializing it at the same time to avoid the stupid mistake of using something uninitialized.
Interestingly enough, testing with clang shows that uninitialized variables get their warning, but uninitialized raw pointers don't.
The majority of people that end up in hospitals actually survive the virus. Their symptoms are treated, not the causes, unfortunately. But you have to take these people in as they have (among other things) respiratory complications, hence the great demand for ventilators incidentally.
Infection Fatality Rate is certainly coupled to the number of people that develop severe symptoms, but it's not this number that you need to look at as to why people end up in hospitals.
I'll never understand how people come to believe that civilian amateurs with AR-15 have somewhat of a chance against trained professionals with heavy equipment. The mental gym to justify the 2A is really mindboggling.