I know you can implement it with out XML, I do DI all day long with functions.
Non-sequitur. Most .Net DI frameworks (as opposed to DI in Java, or DI without a framework) use configuration in code. This is generally much more readable and flexible than config in XML. Only some of them use functions for some things.
the effect is the same as intentional scraping and outright stealing
The google engineers intentionally sent this click data to Bing, so is Bing really stealing? It's odd to act surprised when Bing uses the data that was intentionally sent to it. Bing could specifically ignore Google search results pages when it is tracking clicks, but is that legitimate? Google scrapes everything, why shouldn't Bing?
The point of collecting click data is not to target google engineers, it is to collect data from masses of people doing regular searches and to improve them by seeing which links get clicked on, so obviously Bing is "taking data for non-google engineers". Furthermore, there's no indication that google search results pages are even distinguished from other pages in this.
In fact, the data that it takes from Google engineers for carefully engineered corner-case searches is the exception.
"Algorithms are for people who don't know how to buy RAM"... really shows a startling lack of understanding
Are you perhaps missing that it's a deliberate inversion of the more obvious statement "needing more RAM is for people who don't know how to use Algorithms" in order to make the point that RAM is cheaper than an engineer's time?
Which is why it's sometimes stated as "Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily" - i.e pick the explanation with the fewest moving parts. That's less subjective, assuming you can agree on how to count the entities.
1. Things always fall down
This is not actually an explanation at all, it just restates the observation.
2. There exists gravitational force between bodies
Newton's inverse square law of gravitation is simpler than relativity, and it's good enough for a lot of uses. But it is not a viable explanation either, since it does not fit exactly with observed reality - it does not handle the edge cases of very fast or very heavy stuff.
This makes testable, measurable predictions about "why things fall down", i.e. "things fall down because all things obey the law of universal gravitation as given in the formula...". But it doesn't even begin to explain why there is gravity all rather than no gravity. Science is largely silent about this category of question of meaning not measurement - it observes reality and predicts based on extrapolating from existing observations. Other explanations of "why"
are hardly much better - "gravity exists because God said so" aren't very satisfying since you can't test it or infer anything from it.
Define "run" ? They don't decide what you eat for lunch, so what do they decide and what don't they? I ask since you can't argue against a statement that isn't even coherent. All you can do is point out that it makes no sense.
I have always chosen to hang out with people that are more like-minded. However, just over Christmas, I had the pleasure of interacting with family which brought up this question.
Although I don't see them much, some of them are pretty educated. It's kinda sad, actually, to see them truly believe this stuff. So it's more out of me genuinely wanting to help them, not prove them wrong.
Whether the president makes the decisions or if it's someone behind him, what I was asking was about the level of the decisions made.
For instance, it's plausible that the decision to invade Iraq in 2003 was made well in advance by a small group. Is that what is meant by "run the US"? The outcome and consequences of the Iraq war don't seem to have gone to anyone's plan. What part of the US is being "run" and what part isn't?
To go even further: if someone got dumped on their wedding day because they texted their other girlfriend and the fiancée found out, the media's story will be that it's their own fault and you can't rage at the phone software.
I can see all kinds of hilarious subplots coming out of this- Man texts vacation plans to mistress, text goes to wife, wife thinks its actually meant for her, man ends up having to buy same trip twice for both of them, etc...
I watched a presentation online by a large software company who used to to do this. They deprecated this as "prioritization by whoever shouts the loudest". Once a crash-bug-reporting system was in place it simply went away, as they had accurate enough data on how many people were affected, and could prioritize based on that. This won't help if it's not a crash bug, but the criticism of "prioritization by whoever shouts the loudest" is still valid.
...I'm actually not getting why this is a bad thing. The people shouting on your crash-bug-reporting system are unhappy enough to go out and yell at you rather than simply grumbling to themselves and continuing to use your program. Doesn't it make sense customer-service-wise to appease those folks who are going to yell about the bugs in your program and negatively influence peoples' opinions?
Non-sequitur. Most .Net DI frameworks (as opposed to DI in Java, or DI without a framework) use configuration in code. This is generally much more readable and flexible than config in XML. Only some of them use functions for some things.