Interesting, I imagine the propaganda was also used for the German public, because they had no idea they were death camps.
Israel would doubtless keep its genocide a secret if it could, but there's just so much evidence created by smartphones. This is actually an example of how technology is making the world a massively better place--it's so much harder to genocide without creating tons of evidence.
Have you seen Ibis[1]? It's a dataframe API that translates calls to it into various backends, including Polars and DuckDB. I've messed around with it a little for cases where data engineering transforms had to use pyspark but I wanted to do exploratory analysis in an environment that didn't have pyspark.
Are there a lot of manual steps in managing an xcode project? E.g. does it say "now go into xcode and change this setting" instead of changing the setting directly? Or are you using a tool like xcodegen?
Very few - the only manual things I do are;
- clicking the distribute button to push the bundle to the App Store
- filling in the compliance survey and App Store listing content
- linking some components together e.g. for creating a VPN installer and tunnel i had to click some things in the Xcode UI
I automate as much as possible;
-“create 12 app icons for this in SVG and present them to me in a HTML page so I can choose one and then use that for the app icon and splash screen”
- “create a demo mode toggle in settings and populate the app with fake data and then open up simulators for the correct image dimensions for the App Store listing so I can crate screenshots”
- sometimes it tell me I have to other things like set up the entitlements to which is say “no - you do it and don’t forget to fill in the description that gets shown to the user so the feature actually works”
I knew very little about Swift or Xcode profile to this and TBH I still don’t know that much about it, but I’m experienced enough to know when I’m being fed something that doesn’t look or feel right programmatically or architecturally.
I think it would be better to have one of each of the main AIs / coding tools running instead of all the same model and tool. That way you can keep tabs on latest developments while doing your work. Also if you use multiple providers / tools, you can take advantage of more free credits that way, because some providers have a few free credits each month.
No, it doesn't. From their "commitment" [1] which was affirmed by the courts as binding in a 2010s court case (Organic Seed Growers & Trade Ass'n v. Monsanto):
> We do not exercise our patent rights where trace amounts of our patented seeds or traits are present in a farmer’s fields as a result of inadvertent means.
> where trace amounts of our patented seeds or traits are present in a farmer’s fields as a result of inadvertent means.
That sounds like a very hollow commitment to me. Who defines what "trace" is. Monsanto?
And what is the normal cross pollination rate from doing nothing. 1% 5%? It sounds like it just means we won't sue you the first year, we'll wait until the second year then sue you.
The practice needs to be banned. It's Monsanto seeds that are spreading their genetics in the wind. If they don't want that, then make crops that can't. If they're unable to, then tough.
Saying nobody within pollination range can grow their own crops anymore once someone nearby purchases Monsanto seeds is absurd.
That's all aside from the fact that patenting things that reproduce still is somewhat of a weak concept to begin with.
Putting an absurd tech spin on it. If you made a robot/machinr that could replicate itself sure patent it. If you made a robot that sent out radio waves and every machine within receiving distance could/would suddenly replicate, you can't sue those owners for "stealing your technology".
The proof is in the pudding. To my knowledge Monsanto has never sued anyone over inadvertent cross contamination regardless of the percentages. The cases where they have sued were farmers who explicitly went out and got Roundup resistant seeds to use with Roundup from unlicensed vendors or in violation of a license they themselves signed with Monsanto.
It has never made any sense for them to enforce it against cross contamination because farmers don't want the seeds if they're not already nuking everything with glyphosate. They either buy F1 seeds every year for the extra yield hybrid vigor gives them or they save seed that's somewhat optimized for their growing conditions.
> Saying nobody within pollination range can grow their own crops anymore once someone nearby purchases Monsanto seeds is absurd.
This is a fantasy you have concocted, not the reality.
I don't see how the cartel could win by doing terror attacks in the US. Nobody likes them here. They won't have popular support. The US military will have enormous popular support. This won't be like Afghanistan or Vietnam or anything like that.
> I don't see how the cartel could win by doing terror attacks in the US.
Retaliation (if the attacks were actually impacting cartels at all, which most reports that don't come from the US government cast doubt on) does not require a rational plan for victory. (OTOH, the way they could win by doing that is to provoke a reaction by a government intent on being seen to be doing something about the attacks so that it responds in a way which has either direct [because of poor targeting] or collateral [because of lack of restraint] adverse impacts on uninvolved domestic populations sufficient to make the government campaign unpopular independent of how unpopular its nominal targets are. Of course, this would take an administration that is both unusually prone to poorly aimed violent actions and unusually unconcerned with due process and the rule of law, but that’s exactly what produced the current situation, anyway.)
Yeah the qualification criteria are undefined, and some criteria are easily gamed, so this ultimately their criteria is going to probably be some combination of:
- Those who have connections
- Those who have an immutable trait that puts them in a minority (after all, there's not enough money / slots for a majority to qualify)
Which makes this a highly political program no matter how you look at it.
If Rust was like Communism, there would be dozens of examples of massive codebases that ported to Rust and ended up with massive infighting, culminating in 20% of the developers being assassinated by the moderation team.
Is this something from the post-war or did that really exist?