The truth of the claim you’re making seems deeply unknowable. Your certainty triggers me.
Is there some technical definition of “predict” that you are assuming?
Then going long or short on a security is easy?
The machine will know which sort of person tries to fool it in the way that you are trying to fool it.
Why play defense when you can play offense?
So, the leader is an expert on “joint A+B tasks”? Then provided he, the leader, can identify, A tasks, B tasks and A+B tasks and correctly defer on the first two sets, won’t we get optimal decision making? And are we…
What are the specifics of a culture that transcends these organizational hazards? How does it work?
Then every time I want to make a query I must re-audit the JavaScript source? And, do you have any ideas about setting up the proxy so that I don’t have to trust that it is being operated as advertised?
Is the implication that a company can spend more time and money to get each subsystem to subsystem-expert-acceptance level, or is there something about current organizational practice that makes even this impossible?
Right, so the desired effect is “more and better developed OSS software”, but why should I believe “Amazon embracing the OSS community” leads to that effect?
What about subjects like “building rockets that are moon-capable”? All experts know negligible amounts about this subject, but organizations have “sufficient” knowledge.
> Corporations are inherently stupid. Is it that groups of people are inherently stupid, or is there some facet of corporations that makes them in particular stupid?
Why is it awesome? Why should I believe that Amazon “embracing the OSS community” will have some desired effect?
I think the burden is on the person suggesting I take an action (eg, donate money to charity X) to provide evidence that the action will have some desired effect. My position is that all actions have mostly…
How do I verify that my query is being encrypted in the browser? And is the proxy a service under your control?
> Certainly, one may choose to research the institutions they donate to, if they don't trust them by name. That is not unique to suicide prevention, therefore it's an unnecessary qualifier in the current discussion. I…
> Unless one believes that all efforts to prevent suicide are entirely futile...? I don’t even need to think that. I can just think that it’s “hard” to differentiate between organizations that are “good” at stopping…
Am I supposed to believe that “donating to the suicide prevention foundation” has something to do with stopping future suicides? Because I don’t see why I should jump to that conclusion.
> The cto should focus on strategic thinking and have one or two devs that lead daily work Your comment is complete nonsense. With good reasons (personnel, external demands, goals), the working dynamic varies widely…
The truth of the claim you’re making seems deeply unknowable. Your certainty triggers me.
Is there some technical definition of “predict” that you are assuming?
Then going long or short on a security is easy?
The machine will know which sort of person tries to fool it in the way that you are trying to fool it.
Why play defense when you can play offense?
So, the leader is an expert on “joint A+B tasks”? Then provided he, the leader, can identify, A tasks, B tasks and A+B tasks and correctly defer on the first two sets, won’t we get optimal decision making? And are we…
What are the specifics of a culture that transcends these organizational hazards? How does it work?
Then every time I want to make a query I must re-audit the JavaScript source? And, do you have any ideas about setting up the proxy so that I don’t have to trust that it is being operated as advertised?
Is the implication that a company can spend more time and money to get each subsystem to subsystem-expert-acceptance level, or is there something about current organizational practice that makes even this impossible?
Right, so the desired effect is “more and better developed OSS software”, but why should I believe “Amazon embracing the OSS community” leads to that effect?
What about subjects like “building rockets that are moon-capable”? All experts know negligible amounts about this subject, but organizations have “sufficient” knowledge.
> Corporations are inherently stupid. Is it that groups of people are inherently stupid, or is there some facet of corporations that makes them in particular stupid?
Why is it awesome? Why should I believe that Amazon “embracing the OSS community” will have some desired effect?
I think the burden is on the person suggesting I take an action (eg, donate money to charity X) to provide evidence that the action will have some desired effect. My position is that all actions have mostly…
How do I verify that my query is being encrypted in the browser? And is the proxy a service under your control?
> Certainly, one may choose to research the institutions they donate to, if they don't trust them by name. That is not unique to suicide prevention, therefore it's an unnecessary qualifier in the current discussion. I…
> Unless one believes that all efforts to prevent suicide are entirely futile...? I don’t even need to think that. I can just think that it’s “hard” to differentiate between organizations that are “good” at stopping…
Am I supposed to believe that “donating to the suicide prevention foundation” has something to do with stopping future suicides? Because I don’t see why I should jump to that conclusion.
> The cto should focus on strategic thinking and have one or two devs that lead daily work Your comment is complete nonsense. With good reasons (personnel, external demands, goals), the working dynamic varies widely…