Before Brexit the chosen enemy was Polish people/generic eastern Europeans. They are ostensibly white, but many conflicts were over the number of them that were coming to the UK to work, despite that they were mostly doing jobs with high demand like cleaners.
It's only since Brexit that non-European immigration has skyrocketed, as well as the onset of the small-boats issue, since we can no longer send them back to France.
Don't re-write history.
If you ever see someone ask a lawyer how they can represent a murder defendant, this is why.
I love that nobody watched anything on Yahoo! Screen except for that one season of Community
Interesting, could be a move away from typewise, do you support their gestures? Left to delete and up for capitalised.
Like, you might have someone working on something in a new codebase but misunderstanding the architecture or just going in the wrong direction in general and a review is the best way to correct course before getting too far in
I think the article is suggesting this person should be pair programmed with until they understand the architecture and can be trusted to contribute correctly, and I actually kind of agree - it always feels terrible to tell someone a PR they've worked on possibly for days is completely the wrong direction, and arguably this is already 'too far in' if they're going to need to essentially start again.
Intervening earlier in the process should lead to less wasted effort overall, but people often seem to treat pair programming like its two people at 50% efficiency, when it actually saves a lot of cycle time on reviewing code.
Any service you depend on in the modern world, you need to be asking yourself 'what will I do when this enshitifies itself'. And it is a when.
Short termism on all sides is destroying our society.
For playing with, rather than 'serious' projects
More than the huge amount of trash floating there? I feel this is missing the forest for the trees
If you are referring to the public actions of the President of the United States as 'deep state' you're just mad at the state. No need to jump at shadows when there is a very real and very objectional government right there doing it in the open.
Alternatively, following their logic, keep the number of people and achieve massively higher productivity. But they don't want that, they want to reduce the number of people having opinions and diluting the share pool, because its not about productivity, its about exerting control.
Sorry but what even is a 'technical 1v1'?
It also depends when you submit them though, if you only submit them in 2 months they can't tell how much was before and after the change, so will assume it is all after. This is even if they aren't estimating your readings.