I would limit myself to using ai to explain and not use the tech to fix or create anything.
Learning takes time and effort. One has to understand something and then make some excercises to make it stick.
Also providing examples how to do something would be OK. Not different from searching for info and reading some blog or stack overflow.
It’s run by a travel agency called Gondwana Collection. The watering hole is at the Namib Desert Lodge [1] so it’s not really remote, they just use whatever internet provides wifi for guests. The watering hole is set up to attract wild animals for the tourists to see so that’s often who runs them. The livestream is a cheap way for them to attract guests.
Answering that specific question, 98 jumped up 16% this spring and... that's it. Except for that, it's an ordinary curve compared to, say, 5 years ago. And that's mostly the result of actually bombing the refineries.
And yes, if US and EU were serious about helping Ukraine win, this would have already happened back in 2022. Or better yet, back in 2014.
As it is, US & EU sanctions seem to be more of a theater mostly for the benefit of the population of those countries, so that their politicians can sincerely say that they "support Ukraine".
Depends on the claim - some are, some aren't. The problem obviously exists, but the coverup is good enough to make lots of people think that the war happens on another planet and doesn't affect them (e.g. gasoline export ban).
"In breaking news, Russia is extending the complete ban on all petrol exports through the rest of 2025 for producers and distributors, and is banning diesel exports for distributors.
Fuel shortages have spread to almost all of Russia, with the Ministry of Energy insisting that “all necessary measures are being taken to ensure the timely and uninterrupted supply of all essential fuel.”"
The only reasonable definition of "work" is "stop the thing that motivated the sanction from happening". With that definition, sanctions rarely work (or if they do, not in a very effective way). Russia is still at war with Ukraine. Iran is still developing nuclear weapons. North Korea did develop nuclear weapons.
Let's not kid ourselves. Russia is still killing Ukrainians right now. They're still occupying Ukraine's land right now. Is this what "work" looks like in your dictionary?
> Ask a russian about the price of fuel.
Oh I see. In your dictionary a working solution is not to stop the war or get lands back, but to ensure average Russian people suffer. Never mind then.
Oil is how Russia funds their war-machine. Bombing refineries makes it harder and less sustainable to keep the war going. It's not about making civilians suffer when you literally need to pressure the enemy into stopping the war by blowing up their infrastructure.
Like all bureaucracies .. the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.
Also our government (I'm a citizen in the kingdom of Denmark) doesn't listen to experts when it comes to IT/security/encryption and is making a fool of itself..
You have a team of 20 engineers on a project you want to maintain velocity on. With that many coooks, you have patches on top of patches of your build system where everyone does the bare minimum to meet the near term task only and it devolves into a mess no one wants to touch over enough time.
Your choice: do you have the most senior engineers spend time sporadically maintaining the build system, perhaps declaring fires to try to pay off tech debt, or hire someone full time, perhaps cheaper and with better expertise, dedicated to the task instead?
CI is an orthogonal problem but that too requires maintenance - do you maintain it ad-hoc or make it the official responsibility for someone to keep maintained and flexible for the team’s needs?
I think you think I’m saying the task is keeping the build green whereas I’m saying someone has to keep the system that’s keeping the build green going and functional.
> You have a team of 20 engineers on a project you want to maintain velocity on. With that many coooks, you have patches on top of patches of your build system ...
The scenario you are describing does not make sense for the commonly accepted industry definition of "build system." It would make sense if, instead, the description was "application", "product", or "system."
Many software engineers use and interpret the phrase "build system" to be something akin to make[0] or similar solution used to produce executable artifacts from source code assets.
I can only relate to you what I’ve observed. Engineers were hired to rewrite the Make-based system into Bazel and maintain it for single executable distributed to the edge. I’ve also observed this for embedded applications and other stuff.
I’m not sure why you’re dismissing it as something else without knowing any of the details or presuming I don’t know what I’m talking about.
>>> You have a team of 20 engineers on a project you want to maintain velocity on. With that many coooks, you have patches on top of patches of your build system ...
>> The scenario you are describing does not make sense for the commonly accepted industry definition of "build system."
> I’m not sure why you’re dismissing it as something else without knowing any of the details or presuming I don’t know what I’m talking about.
My apologies for what I wrote giving the impression of being dismissive or implying an assessment of your knowledge. This was not my intent and instead was my expression of incredulity for a build definition requiring 20 engineers to maintain. Perhaps I misinterpreted the "cooks" responsible for build definition maintenance as being all of those 20 engineers. If so, I hope you can see how someone not involved in your project could reach this conclusion based on the quote above.
Still and all, if this[0] is the Bazel build tool you reference and its use is such that:
With that many coooks[sic], you have patches on top of patches
of your build system where everyone does the bare minimum
to meet the near term task only and it devolves into a mess
no one wants to touch over enough time.
Then the questions I would ask of the project members/stakeholders are:
1 - Does using Bazel reduce build definition
maintenance verses other build tools such as
Make/CMake/etc.?
2 - Does the engineering team value reproducible build
definitions as much as production and test source
artifacts?
3 - If not, why not?
EDIT:
To clarify the rationale behind questions #2 and #3:
Build definitions are production code, because if the system cannot be built, then it cannot be released.
Test suites are production code, because if tests fail, then the build should fail and the system cannot be released.
I worked in companies that did this .. 20 years ago. I didn't imagine that this was still possible.
For me it's just about rules/discipline: Commit working code with passing unottests. Everyone is responsible for fixing stuff. You break something you'll fix it.
We as a country are exposed to being attacked by Russia. Be that cyber attacks or destruction of assets by sleeper agents.
So instead of decentalizing the electrical grid and making sure it's secure someone at Dansk Supermarked thinks it will earn them money to be prepared for some future crisis.
I find the article native.. it says they trust Nets (payment company) to work offline ..
I have a feeling tens of thousands of drones would be a better investment if your concern is Russia vs NATO. But if it’s just a business reacting to popular sentiment then it’s a fine business strategy I guess. Or just useful spin / wealthy owners paranoia.
The people in a position to buy thousands of drones and the people in a position to build emergency supermarkets aren't the same people. And regardless, if you do find yourself in a war--especially if it's a defensive one--you need both.
Don’t worry, most countries are buying tens of thousands of drones. That investment is happening. (Source: I work in this sector)
(Worth noting: Your comment sounds like “I have a feeling fixing (critical bug 1) would be a better investment than (fixing critical bug 2)”. You fix both.)
>We as a country are exposed to being attacked by Russia.
No you are not. First - no one can find you on a map. You are so tiny. Second for a conventional warfare Russia will have to go trough many many countries to get to you, no matter which road they take (also anyone that thinks Russia is a credible threat is smoking something strong - they don't have the capacity to subdue backwater as eastern Ukraine, let alone more developed and prepared countries as Poland, Germany or Finland, Sweden). And preparedness won't help you for nuclear.
Greenland can become independent if they wish. There would be some things to work out, but the legal framework has been in place since the 1970es. And they seem to be working towards the goal.
The reason it hasn't happened yet is that they'd either have to increase tax income greatly, or reduce public spending greatly with financial support from Denmark. As I gather, infrastructure up there is really expensive.
The distance between Kalilingrad (Russia) and the island of Bornholm (Denmark) is only about 300 km (or 200 miles). They don't have to go to 'many many countries' to get to Denmark. Please look at a map.
Ahh yes. The military powerhouse that is Kaliningrad - which to make any kind of buildup or resupply you have to trample trough two NATO countries. Or to sail Russia's nonexistent or pathetic (in best of times) fleet trough a lot of hostile waters.
The west always assumed Russia would (attempt to) close the gap between Belarus and Kaliningrad at Poland's corner.
>The military powerhouse that is Kaliningrad
Kaliningrad actually does have a sizable (for Russia) military investment, which is why the west would expect them to defend it in that way.
I don't think Russia COULD do that anymore, unless it was entirely a Belarus operation. But if they succeed at rushing that gap, current war "meta" is extremely defensive-sided. Russia may not have a meaningful "fleet" but they certainly have enough working and pretty good submarines to make hell for anyone trying to then supply Lithuania.
You know where Kaliningrad is but you couldn't find Denmark (aka the country that includes that big piece of land next to Canada that Trump and Vance have been talking about annexing) on a map?
Sorry, but Russia is a credible threat that keeps killing people in Ukraine and threatens going nuclear.
China is betting on us rather pivoting than engaging with Russian army. If we seem tough enough, we call it.
We can then also negotiate better rate for the US protection racket, becauss the US fuckers decided to more than double the rate recently and we are unhappy about that. Long term we will rearm ourselves on our own terms.
I try to limit my kids exposure to electronic devices while they are small.
I can't avoid it, but I try.
I consider blacklisting YouTube at our house. The withdrawal symptoms look like people having tried drugs. This is scary.
I noticed that playing with phones for shorter amounts of time is ok and the kids get creative as soon as they don't have access to electronic entertainment.
Currently I play chess with them and do reading. My kids are 4 and 7.
This was a bit off topic, but I think that parents should stop exposing their kids to electronic entertainment.. its worse than drugs.
I'm in my 40'ies. I grew up without computers initially and had a c64/amiga to play games on.
I made a laptop for my kids which blocks all social media and only allows educational software. I think that the brain-dead entertainment loop is the problem. It takes no effort to learn something.
I agree that the best thing would be to buy all the various keyboard I hesitate, use them for a while, and finally decide which one is best ... but it's costly :p
I don't want to .. but people keep using it because it's simpler than other build systems.
Many UI tools based on eclipse use make under the hood.
Many recipes used by Yocto just use make to build the software and then install the output somewhere.
It all depends what you're trying to build and where you work.
reply