I just finished "Becoming Steve Jobs" by Brent Schlender and Rick Tetzeli. Not a full bio but has some great stories about Steve Jobs at NeXT, Pixar, and his return to Apple.
If I remember correctly was written almost as a reaction to the official biography misunderstanding/misrepresenting the character. I'd say that it's a difficult biography to write since his character seems to have changed quite a lot over his lifetime, and accounts from one era will not be applicable to another. Small Fry is an interesting personal account over time, but obviously very biased and particular. I really enjoyed folklore.org for a look at the professional side of things from a very specific period, and would recommend the hypercritical episode on the book [0] for some good arguments on why Isaacson was the wrong person to write the biography.
One of the themes (reflected in the title, even) of "Becoming Steve Jobs" is precisely that Jobs changed. For example, it starts out with a formative episode from early in his career that the authors use to illustrate how Jobs constantly used failures to re-evaluate his approach to work and life, as develop his character.
I have this eerie suspicion that GDPR cases will be a haven for trollish and/or opportunist behavior. Instead of huge corporations having to shell out significant money to swallow up start-up competitors, they could much more cheaply pay EU citizens to exploit the huge burden of the law on small companies or even solo endeavors. I hope I can be convinced to be optimistic.
Yes, government regulation is unquestionably more of a burden to companies without legal teams. If you’re smaller it’s an eternal calculus of flying under the radar and trying not to be the bug that gets the windscreen.
I'm kinda hoping my pessimism becomes justified. At that point, I can then only hope that an epiphany is reached and other approaches used without resorting to large sweeping legislation (which, among many other things could include more timid and actually enforced legislation at first). However, regardless of which side of the Atlantic I look on, it seems legislators only double down when their desired effect is not achieved. They only know one direction.
Honest question: is it worth calling my Congress person if they are already vehemently against repealing the current net neutrality rules? Does it count for anything?
Yes. You don't know what kind of discussions are going on behind the scenes. It could be that they say "I am for this" in public, but in private they are one policy concession away from voting no. Also, it takes like 5 minutes. It is literally no skin off your back, and it is better than nothing, even if the chances of it mattering are remote.
Yes. If nothing else, it removes their political capital. Politicians are weighing which unpopular things they can do while still maintaining their donor base.
Make this cost them. Even if they vote for it. Even if they've supported it all along.
And encourage all your family and friends to call, too. The tipping point for getting a representative to change their mind might be smaller than you think, just like how lobbying dollars required to get a vote for a law are smaller than you may think.
I don’t have numbers for how many calls might be needed to flip a vote though. Does anyone have experience with this?
Exactly... most pro-proposal folks are not going to call in asking them to support (since it benefits industry). So as many anti-proposal folks that can call in, the better. Also document their response for the next election cycle - pro Trump, pro cable company, anti internet freedom, etc.
If a scenario is possible under the new proposal, point that out =>
"Soon, your cable company can intentionally make your Youtube/Pinterest/Facebook slow. Ask your congress man/woman why they are willing to support this? <Congress contact info> <Website to protest>"
or
"Are you ready for slower Youtube? You can upgrade for $X to make it normal again. Your friendly ISP/Cable company. Ask your congress man/woman why they are willing to support this? <Congress Contact Info> <Website to protest>"
You have to use simple language in terms people understand, and provide a number to call.
I'd argue this might only be helpful in an area where the margin between the two parties is slim and hotly contested. That's an exception. For the most part you'll get some canned response to make you feel like they heard you, and things will proceed however their big time donors wish.
I'm not sure I understand the complaints. What will a "stable" tag offer that isn't available already via dev builds? Are there things that are limiting your productivity or effectiveness? How will formally calling it "stable" change your life as a developer?
I'm not sure if this is addressing the question precisely, but I think it's relevant. One of the main things I've learned over the years is that you have to be your own advocate when it comes to raises/promotions. I've known a lot of developers who became disgruntled over years because they didn't think the company was taking the initiative and giving them what they thought they're worth.
It wasn't until it sunk into my head that, generally speaking, there's an inherent conflict of interest between employer and employee. The employer wants to get the best bang for their buck; have talented people work for them at the lowest reasonable price. On the opposite end, the employee obviously wants to get paid the most they can get. It's because of this that (most of the time) an employer won't proactively seek out reasons to pay you more. Once I truly realized this, I became a stronger advocate for myself (because nobody else will be). This is usually the advice I give to younger developers who are working their way up the latter.. aside from saying that you should actually build your case for why a raise/promotion is appropriate. Do the work - do more than is expected of you - and be your own advocate.
Yes, this conflict exists. On the other hand, if a large gap appears between an employees' salaries and their market rate, that increases the company's turnover.
Turnover is very expensive, somewhere between 6 months and 2 years of salary per employee that turns over. So an employer should proactively offer raises to keep their employees' salaries near market rate and help avoid turnover costs.
It's short-sighted to keep salaries low. That's not to say companies don't do short-sighted things though...
I try to use Android Pay when I can just for the security benefits of the one-use tokens. Sometimes it's easy, other times it takes forever.. particularly if my cell reception isn't great in the store. Once all stores truly make use of the card chip in the United States, I'll probably just use that because it's essentially the same thing. At this point probably 95% of the stores I shop at still want me to swipe the card rather than enable the chip receiver.
Same here. I don't care about the convenience, but mostly about the security benefits. In the past 4 years I had to get two credit cards and one debit card replaced after fraudulent charges / fraudulent ATM transactions. Yes - as a customer I'm not liable for those charges, but it's still annoying if it, e.g., takes a few weeks until your bank refunds you the hundreds of Dollars that someone withdrew from your checking account.
Surely it's Amazon's fault that Prime Video doesn't work on Chromecast. Amazon would get a lot more of my digital goods dollars if they took a "Kindle" approach to streaming video -- make it available everywhere.
So this process re-introduces the brine back into the ocean, in turn making the ocean water more salty. What type of ecological ramifications does this have on the wildlife in that area?
This is pretty much the most pressing concern in any desalination effort.. Intakes and discharges are expensive in general, but to adequately dilute a brine discharge is on the order of 5x the cost of the intake system. You basically need miles of pipe into the ocean that split off like a fan in order to not significantly disrupt nearby ecosystems.
The volume of water being drawn from and the volume of evaporation, precipitation and runoff affecting that body of water, dwarf this desalination plant by an exceedingly long way.
It's not the overall volume of slightly saltier water, it's the hot, concentrated brine that's damaging. Most systems are designed today such that the brine is only ~50% more salty than incoming water and only a few degrees warmer, but it's still a significant ecological issue.
