That’s the common gag, but ACTUALLY the difference is in whether the recipient of the comment was open to hearing it and whether the speaker intends merely those literal words or has other implications.
That’s the common gag, but ACTUALLY the difference is in whether the recipient of the comment was open to hearing it and whether the speaker intends merely those literal words or has other implications.
I carefully read through the article and did not find a link to the study. Would you be willing to share the link here?
This article starts off as a response to another article, but doesn’t link to the article it is talking about! I found that frustrating and poor form, community-wise.
Great question – would someone ask that of my boss please? 😉
How concerned should I be?
What are the unspecified policies the developer claims that the company has failed to uphold? Who is this particular developer, and how much should I trust them? (I don’t follow nginx development at all.)
I celebrate the fact that open source licenses exist specifically to allow people to make a fork like this when they have disagreements! But I don’t know enough about this particular case to decide how it should affect my own plans.
On my profile it says “redditor for 18 years”.
The ad hominem criticism is irrelevant. The communities should be removed or not removed based on the server’s policies regardless of who first raised the question.
I found that to be pretty insightful.
I completely agree with the analysis that the ability to search is in tension with privacy and a guarantee that posts will be forgotten. Allowing individual posts to declare how they should be shared is a good idea.
It really needs a fourth block that just says “Python”.
(For those who don’t get the joke, in Python the way that one exits a loop over an iterator is to keep going until the iterator throws an exception. It sounds dumb at first, but in truth, that’s only if you think that exceptions are incredibly heavyweight compared to other operations.)
Actually, banks are a heavily regulated industry and they have to comply with strict non-discrimination requirements including making all reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities.
If you know someone who uses a screen reader and is therefore unable to use HSBC’s app, encourage them to file a complaint with the appropriate regulator (in the US, try https://www.consumerfinance.gov/complaint/ ).
Banks are very attentive about listening to their regulators.
(Of course, it’s possible that what HSBC did still works with commonly used screen readers for the blind because they actually thought of this.)