I think you really hit the nail on the head. Software engineering is quite hard, it's also a very broad field now, and you have to love it to do well.
When I'm interviewing it's one of the things I strongly look for. Even if the interviewee has some other weaknesses or lack of experience, passion for what you're doing can make up for it.
for 4. ...as best can tell, no easy way to navigate to that folder's parent
You can add a button to the toolbar in Finder (customize it from options) that when dropped down will show the complete path to the current folder as a list. You can use that to move up the tree.
The question I have is what's in it for Microsoft, why did they even bother to do this in the first place? I can't believe there would be that big of a cash incentive.
If this were Windows, I would expect Microsoft to pass it to an internal department that sells higher service contracts and then off to 3rd parties that provide the same for up to a week after you find the "don't share my data" checkbox.
That (enterprise support) is a very important side business. Whether they got cash from other OSes or just set it up the same to fight an eventual Anti-Trust Case is anyone's guess.
Would you not then need to wait until they were mature enough to have extracted a large enough quantity of Co2, and then chip them up and bury them back underground where all the oil came from in order to net extract Co2 before planting new trees in their place and going for another round.
Otherwise the Co2 will be returned to the atmosphere once the tree rots or is burned for fuel.
Forests that we don't cut down is called reservations.
In Sweden there is a law that states that any forest cut down must be replanted unless used for farming or new buildings. I also recall Norawy having the similar law. If we counted that as carbon removal, we would have a massive carbon net negative from this pretty old law.
The law is not a carbon removal strategy. It simply maintain current biomass over time.
I don't think they are short-sighted. I think they realise that the app store gives them such a leg up in the process of packaging, distributing, managing updates, helping with discoverability, ensuring platform compatibility and (optionally) taking payment of their software that they easily see the value advantage to going on the app store other than doing all that themselves.
Managing all of that yourself would leave less time for development, would cost a lot more than the app store fees & cut and would be in itself an insurmountable barrier to many who might not even bother (particularly small freeware apps).
On the whole I'd say the app store benefits the majority of developers, particularly smaller ones.
The companies that do chafe at the bit though are the larger ones for whom all of that infrastructure is already taken care of, and it's no barrier for them. They seem to resent Apple's cut which would probably explain the Fortnite fracas.
Everything you've described is exactly the things they are short-sighted about - if you need to grow your business these are the things you need control and oversight over, and need to master. Betting your business on one horse (whose feet are tied) is just plain stupid.
Me too. Wouldn’t be cool if the robots dance along humans, replacing iconic videoclips or scenes? Like the scene of Jerry (from Tom & Jerry) dancing with Gene Kelly https://youtu.be/2msq6H2HI-Y
Or Paula Abdul “Opposites attract” https://youtu.be/xweiQukBM_k
You dont want to be anywhere near heavy powerful moving machinery, thats basic OSH. Glitching robot could snap your neck without skipping a beat (so to speak). There are hundreds of videos on the internet of people being decapitated, torn apart and squished by machinery. Not to mention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Williams_(robot_fatalit...
These robots are nowhere near the strength of an industrial one, so that’s a bad comparison - it is perfectly safe to dance alongside them.
I am not sure about the exact number, but the dog-like robot can handle at most 30-40 kilos of weight, maybe the humanoid a bit more but in the same ballpark. The most dangerous would be the rolling one, since it has a counterweight, and crashing into someone would be bad but that’s it.
They are absolutely not your average “able to lift 1 tonne” hydraulic arm robots that could indeed barely notice a human as resistence in its movement.
the issue is that people would probably not want to pay for an app like WhatsApp, and so the 'free' alternative takes hold, and whoever controls that gets the cost of running the infrastructure in advertisement fees.
If some company could set themselves up as a utility, and the mobile network operators were to pay that company to run the messaging app + infra, then it could be made to operate like a utility and nobodies data would have to be sold.
I could remember initially paying for a Whatsapp subscription a couple of years ago, I was happy to do so as I believed they were providing an essential service.
I think for that to work you need a strong public transport system (regular daily, frequent enough and comprehensive) as well as having multi-purpose buildings so that companies are mixed in housing, as well as green places and areas for people to meet, sit chat and go shopping.
Doctors, dentists, hairdressers, cafes, bakeries and flower shops all fit nicely with housing.
When I'm interviewing it's one of the things I strongly look for. Even if the interviewee has some other weaknesses or lack of experience, passion for what you're doing can make up for it.