Its been the standard in Europe also. This has been changing, but only recently.
Its been the standard in Europe also. This has been changing, but only recently.
Yes, it is still a quartz watch. The oscillator is still a quartz oscillator. However the mechanism which advances the second hand is replaced with onethat does not need to tick.
The kind of quartz watch is no longer a ticking quartz watch, it is a non-ticking quartz watch.
As for the specific wording of the article, I would assume the authoris not fully versed in partsof quartz watches, and does not know that the oscillator which keeps time is different from the stepping motor which moves the hands.
This invention targets only replacing the stepping motor, not the oscillator.
Thats exactly the proposition. Eliminate tifking quartz watches in favor of non-ticking quartz watches.
Say goodbye to the quartz watches that do tick replace them with ones that do not tick
French innovator aims to consign ticking quartz watches to history
The ‘ticking’ is what is being consigned to history. The article is about an alternative to ‘ticking quartz watches’, a non-ticking quartz watch
Its the ‘ticking’ part of ticking quartz
exactly this. If I need to do development, i’ll use a jetbrains product. If i’m in a pure text editing situation, I want the most powerful thing for manipulating text, and I want it to be available.
Vim can have some IDE-like qualities, if you bolt enough plugins in to it, but by default it affords buttinx text in a file and manipulating it.
I woudn’t classify it as an ide though.
I literally cannot believe we are arguing about this bullshit when Ohio exists
I see this meh-meh come up occasionally, and I’m always amused because designers are constantly looking at the competition and adjusting to suit. Why do you think all sebtites look the same?
Also, remember Human Resources Machine. Its a puzzle game thats actually a progamming language
The one wheel works by having the rider lean in a direction to go that way. The more you lean, the faster it goes. It balances by pushing the rider in that direction. The trick is when you are leaning and going very fast, but then the board loses power and can’t push you anymore. Then the board nose dives and ejects you. Its the physics of the board, so they can warn you it might happen, but not prevent it.
Fuck, if I was doing ecommerce on salesforce commerce cloud, I would hate programing too. The plus side is that you have something on the resume now. That makes a huge difference in your job prospects now. Its not the hottest market, but you do have a way to pay the bills so you can take some time. Just start applying again, is my advice
Scare pieces like this are created by people who have no actual understanding of software.
Software is the automation of conceptual tasks. Some of these, like taxes or text editing, were fairly procedural and automated early. Others, like identifying birds or deepfaking celebreties, are dificult and were done later.
Creating software is another conceptual task, and it might be possiple to automate it. But once we have automated creating software, automating any other task becomes trivial as well.
If this ever comes to pass, there are no safe majors.
Note:
just like you council people out when they underperform for your org, council people out when they can no longer grow or advance. Those people will also be unhappy over time, and create drag on your whole org. Make opportunites to grow, to grow elswhere in the company, and finally at other companies
Yeah, this. I lean heavily into coaching, which is specifically helping them apply skills they already have to a problem.
I also draw clear lines between what I can help with and what I need to do for the company, and try my best to display when I am fighting for them and when I cannot. Building trust is a key part of the relationship, and having suspicion that you are two faced kills it dead.
With this and the other things mentioned, I too have only had peopae quit because of money, and in one instance he came to me to ask if he should do so (we talked it out without me giving any advice, just comparing opportunities)
This is going to end well
Both styles have advantages and disadvantages. Fully procedural code actually breaks down in readability after a certain length, some poeple suggest 100 or maybe 200 lines, depending on how much is going on in the function.
Blanket maxims tend to to have large spaces where they don’t apply.
Additionally, the place where the code on the right is more likely to cause bugs and maintainability issues is the mutation of the pizza argument in the functions. Argument mutation is important for execution time and memory performance, but is also a strong source of bugs, and should be considered carefully in each situation. We don’t know what the requirements for this code are, but in general we should recomend against universal use of argument mutation (and mutability in general).
They are comparing roman concrete to portland cement, the most common formula. The kind of strength being emphasized is durability, because roman concrete has unique chemistry that allows small cracks to fill themselves. Modern special-purpose concrete blends can outperform roman concrete in other measures of strength, however.
The vast majority of wall time for most uses is io. You need someone on your team to care about big o, but for most teams, its not the problem
Correction: they were all incompetant traitors