Presumably they wanted feature parity with Github Actions. If you have lots of workflows already defined in Github Actions DSL, you're not going to want to port them. And even if you do port them, the activities available in the place you port them aren't going to be the same as Github Actions; there won't be feature parity.
I thought about this when my catalytic converter was stolen. Part of me was like "maybe I should just strap a two $100 bills onto it with a note pleading them not to take it. But then, of course, the type of person to steal a converter is also the type of person that would take the $200 AND steal the converter
Once all cars are autonomous, that day is certainly coming. Even before then, it's very likely we'll see platooning in the future, even if there are still some human drivers.
Also, this already exists in some places. Look at a video of how to cross the street as a pedestrian in Vietnam: You literally just start walking across and people weave around you. Or look at driving in India and similar places.
Seems to me that law enforcement officers should be required to carry liability insurance that they personally pay for. Have a lot of settlements / claims? Your insurance rate goes up. That happens enough and now it's not economically feasible to hold the job
Not just law enforcement, all civil servants should.
I had to spend money to sue the local unemployment office because a bureaucrat there illegally cut off my unemployment payments. They lost and had to pay me back in arrears but that money came from the taxpayers(so me and you) and that asshole who did that is still working there just fine collection golden handcuff paychecks and a gold plated pension when she retires.
All civil servants need a form of direct accountability with consequences for their mistakes at work, especially when malicious and repeated. Currently they're untouchable and the taxpayer foots the bill for their mistakes with no repercussion.
It is better than nothing but it is also adding another middleman between civilians and justice with its primary motivation as personal profit above anything else.
If supressing cases or throwing big money lawyers against legitimate lawsuits is cheaper, they will do it. If teaching cops to hide their corruption is easier than rooting out all the corrupt individuals to raise rates, thats what they will do.
Backup cameras don't require touchscreens, they just require a screen in general. Lots of makes are getting by with just putting a little 3" screen in the rear view mirror or similar
"They" has always (in our lifetimes) been used to refer to a singular person of unknown gender. For example "someone left their coat here. They must be cold"
Indeed. What's new is not referring to someone of unknown gender as "they", but rather people identifying as non-gender-specific, and wanting to be referred to as "they". That's the part that feels so awkward, IMHO, not simply they as one person.
No that's incorrect. Use his/he or her/she if the coat appears to be one that would be worn by a male or female. If uncertain, use male pronouns, which are gender neutral in that scenario.
Incorrect according to who? You? Your Sainted Mother? Sounds innovative to me, and hardly traditional. Saying male is somehow gender neutral sounds even more bizarre.
No, usage makes correctness in language, not people trying to invent some weird conlang they wrongly insist is correct English.
I must have missed the brief somewhere, but there was/is a very clear trend to replace the default male pronoun for gender neutrality with the female pronoun she. Just recently I noticed this in Judea Pearl’s Book of Why. When and why did this start happening? It feels so forced and unnatural. You can sense he’s trying to kiss someone’s ass or appease an authority. At least mix it up a bit at best if you truly give a crap.
reply