It actually sounds like the co-founder knows what he/she's about, and could potentially restart a competitive offering quickly enough. In which case bringing about the demise of the initial now toxic partnership is also an option.
Seeing this, it looks as if there could be a simple workaround to protect anybody who thinks they might be infected, by getting their webserver / proxy to block all incoming http requests with any of these headers.
I read an article recently basically decrying how junior devs (and some not so) are holding tech leaders to ransom unless they adopt the architecture of their choice - microservices being the current hot paradigm, and so they are capitulating in order to keep them, despite the fact that probably 99% of these devs are demanding something they will have zero experience with.
I definitely saw the same thing playing out at my previous company, and not being in the mood for a conflict over that have moved on.
Another advantage of that approach is that if you make sure you always persist the serial number in the canonical format, and immediately parse the incoming value into the canonical form, then comparing 2 serial numbers is easy and consistent - including e.g. when constructing db queries.
I encountered a similar problem where an identity number could be represented in different formats, and the solution had been to store the string representation in all its glorious permutations. Doing db queries to find anything by that key was then impossible until the representation had been made consistent.
Then when e.g. creating reports for different systems we could format the output as per that systems expectation.
I definitely agree with this. Some of the fasted implementations I have ever done were after spending a bit of time modelling the problem solution. Basic data flows, classes (using verb/noun parsing of the requirements doc) and system architecture were all decided before I wrote any code.
The implementation itself just flowed, allowing me to focus on smaller details that can't be modelled (e.g. error handling). By copying the design of classes and function names, I didn't have to backtrack and redo anything, I didn't have to think about names of things - which were pre decided and so consistent throughout the codebase and my code dovetailed nicely with parts that other people implemented.
It's also often very deeply nested and follows different paths based on variables that were set higher up in the code, also depending on deeply nested criteria being met. Bugs, weird states, bad error handling and resource leaks hide easily in such code.
In my experience refactoring out anything nested >3 levels immediately makes the code more readable and easier to follow - I'm talking about c++ code that I recently worked on.
Decomposing to functions and passing as const or not the required variables to functions that then do some useful work makes it clear what's mutated by the sub functions. Make the error handling policy clear and consistent.
Enforce early return and RAII vigorously to ensure that no resources (malloc,file handles,db connections, mutexes, ...) are leaked on error or an exception being thrown.
And suddenly you have a code base that's performant, reliable and comprehensible where people feel confident making changes.
I'm constantly impressed and amazed at how brave that man is, and the other people in Russia who are opposing what seems to have become a totalitarian thug state.
Fortunately it's still not a totalitarian state. It's just an authoritarian kleptocracy where due to rampaging corruption everyone can buy spy agency staff phone billing and banking data for few hundred dollars.
This bold comment is receiving some downvotes, but Tsar Russia, USSR and modern Russia do have a horrible track record. The bloodletting of the Russian revolution was in large part motivated by just how badly the working class was abused, industrialization for them was a hell. Genocides in the baltic states middle of 20th century. Holodomor. All the recent Russian neighbour wars like Chechnya, Georgia, Ukraine. List of examples is long and it's slowly getting lost in the popular history. If you're from Russia or a neighbouring country, it's very likely that you have experienced serious ramifications of its policy or politics.
Wikipedia page on Chekism is an interesting read. A quote I found there. According to Ion Mihai Pacepa (former general in the Communist Romania),
> In the Soviet Union, the KGB was a state within a state. Now former KGB officers are running the state. They have custody of the country’s 6,000 nuclear weapons, entrusted to the KGB in the 1950s, and they now also manage the strategic oil industry renationalized by Putin. The KGB successor, rechristened FSB, still has the right to electronically monitor the population, control political groups, search homes and businesses, infiltrate the federal government, create its own front enterprises, investigate cases, and run its own prison system. The Soviet Union had one KGB officer for every 428 citizens. Putin’s Russia has one FSB-ist for every 297 citizens.
Tsarist Russia was not a totalitarian state. State control over vast swaths of the country was pretty lax, the peasantry lived their lives unmolested except by tax officials and local magnates. Sure, anyone trying to print something would come up against state censorship because printing presses were few and monitored, but many of Russia's peoples weren't even literate pre-1905 or pre-1917.
This is true really only because it was impossible to have one at the time given the communications infrastructure. It was still the worst human rights situation they could possibly create. The peasantry weren't living their lives in freedom, they were human trafficking victims (or as they were known at the time, 'serfs').
Serfdom in Russia was officially ended in 1861. Slavery in the US was ended in 1865.
So I am not sure what "worst human rights situation" are you talking about. This is without even taking into consideration bunch of other countries with horrible abuse of humans. King Leopold anyone? Singling out Russia in this department is a hypocrisy.
Serfdom in Russia ended in the mid 19th century. Plus, serfdom didn't even exist in most of the country, so e.g. peoples from the Volga-Kama region would move just a few hundred km east towards the Urals and found new villages there where control was lax.
It was still an absolute monarchy until 1906, and in the blink of an eye it went from that to dictatorship under the Soviets. For the average serf, ending serfdom just meant they went from literal slavery to strongly implied 'sharecropping' slavery, much like former slaves in the US.
I don't thing there's much of a meaningful different between authoritarian government and totalitarian government aside from the available technology. If the czars had their way, they'd be in Putin's shoes right now, doing Putin things.
I don’t think one can reasonably categorize Tsarist Russia as "authoritarian", let alone totalitarian. Oppressive to many of its people, sure, and at times even despotic. But Russia's political system was such that much of this oppression was perpetuated by local elites, and the monarch in faraway Saint-Petersburg had little relevance to the people and their plight.
What ultimately led to mass unrest and the February and October Revolutions in Russia was the same huge wealth inequality as France prior to 1789, and people don’t typically use terms like “authoritarian” or “totalitarian” to describe the Ancien Régime.
I'm not a historian, but to me the difference between despotic (and I'd say Imperial Russia was despotic at all times, given that it was always a system of unchecked executive power) and authoritarian is splitting hairs.
Sure, it would be impractical for the Tsar to exercise this authority at the individual level all the time, but all the various local vassals only had their power subject to the Tsar's unchecked authority and when the Tsar wanted them to do something, their choices were compliance or ruin.
> people don’t typically use terms like “authoritarian” or “totalitarian” to describe the Ancien Régime.
Alexis de Tocqueville does, in L'Ancien Régime et la Révolution [1]
"In this book, de Tocqueville develops his main theory about the French revolution, the theory of continuity, in which he states that even though the French tried to dissociate themselves from the past and from the autocratic old regime, they eventually reverted to a powerful central government."
I don’t think totalitarian is a useful way to describe Tsarist Russia. It was so far from exercising thought control that vast numbers of its citizens embraced an ideology dedicated to its downfall. (Source: Slezkine’s fabulous book The House of Government).
Not really. But this variant does have novel mutations in sections coding for spike proteins. Whether and how those are functional improvements for the virus are tbd.
https://eurocities.eu/stories/reclaiming-the-streets/
and an article in the Guardian about Barcelona https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/may/17/superblocks-r...
I'm personally heartened by people's moves to de-focus the car in urban places.