Does it impact your friendship? I'd guess you may resent them if they kept a lot of money, especially when you need the money. Or you may start avoiding them completely when you're aware that you didn't achieve a given goal, no? I guess for small amounts it may work but on the long run it seems like a trap.
I just started, so can't really comment on that. So far, it seems fine? We're not talking about life changing amounts of money here; 50 bucks a month at most.
The point for me is to accomplish my goal so I don't have to pay them because I'm a cheapskate.
in my experience (I did pay a few hundred bucks to a friend back in the day) it worked because I felt very bad about giving money like this to someone.
I fail to see a reason where it would be a violation because of the following reasons:
1) it's a response to a user's request, i.e., not initiated by the repo author
2) it depends on consensus of the user.
3) it's not automated (most of the items from the policy are related to automation).
4) the repo author has no obligation whatsoever of maintaining the project. He is not paid or forced to do it.
5) if the user really wants to apply this change or disagrees with this practice, he/she can always fork it.
That said, I understand that it may still not feel "fair" compared to other projects that don't follow this practice. Or the feeling of "wanting to help but you're asked to do some things first".
Companies already do that to accept your pull requests though [0], which takes way longer than giving a star - and I didn't see a complaint about it on HN
It's quid pro quo, isn't it. The repo is buying stars with bug reporting as currency.
Which may well be against GitHub rules but more than that, it's a stupid thing to do. Bug reporting helps projects get better. They're blocking real bug reports until they get a star. Seems like self-harm to me.
There's many cases where that's not true and indeed low-quality bug reports hurt the projects from getting better, specially for mid-to-high popular solo projects.
Think about it in more familiar terms, are more job offers good for searching for a job? It might seems so, but only if you think about well-timed high quality offers. Suddenly getting spammed on your email, linkedin, etc. with dozens+ of low-quality job offers would def not be helpful.
> There's many cases where that's not true and indeed low-quality bug reports hurt the projects from getting better, specially for mid-to-high popular solo projects.
So it's ok to report low quality bugs as long as you give stars?
I know that's not your argument, but this is what this thread is about.
Regardless of the current rule, it really ought to be a violation. If it's not, all repos that care about star rankings are forced to start doing the same thing to compete, which eventually turns stars into a metric of which repos have the highest quantity of annoying problems that users want to report, rather than a metric of whatever it's supposed to measure.
If communist China is anything like communist Europe used to be, finding clever ways to overcome the rules or use them to your advantage is almost a sport, and definitely not considered immoral or unethical by most.
This cheats the other users (like me or you) -- if we are looking at the project's star count, you are likely trying to judge project's popularity and get a measure of how many people like it.
And dae's star count is basically a lie - it does not represent how many people liked it, but rather how many people had found annoying bugs in it. Someone who is forced to use dae and hates it would still need to star it. And as you said, other projects who don't have this practice are in disadvantage.
(And that's why I have no problem with things like CLAs, or requiring details bug reports: they are not user-visible and they don't mess with global rating.)
There's a submission regarding CLAs nearly every month. But complains regarding them is not for the time it takes to sign one. Similarly complains about the practice here aren't for the time it takes to star a repo.
The goal of cybersecurity should be to align cybersecurity with existing processes, but minimizing friction. What the author experienced seems to be a high friction security program, which is the result of a suboptimal cybersecurity program.
This is unfortunately the reality in many companies because cybersecurity is implemented as a subset of a high level information security framework without qualified people to connect the high and low level requirements.
In the past, security departments were the "firewall gatekepeers", choosing who to allow or deny access. They started to change over time from gatekeepers to support the business but this transition is not complete as we know from experience.
The CISO has also has the dillema of having to support the business but will also be held accountable for any hack, which increases the tension on reducing friction vs increasing friction (and increasing control).
This is not an easy problem to fix, but I particularly think it's very productive to see posts like this so we can bring this topic to light and find the right balance.
And for those interested in learning how to add security to their organizations with minimal friction (security by design, especifically), I'm creating some webinars (free on youtube) here: https://devops.security/webinars.html
Two counts of wire fraud, two counts of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, conspiracy to commit commodities fraud, conspiracy to commit securities fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering.
This outcome came about so quickly because she turned state's evidence, in return for what is likely to be an extreme reduction from that maximum (not that it was really a possibility, as a first offender)
I don’t believe so, but the judge sentenced him so harshly because the amount involved was astronomical, exceeding the maximum amount specified by federal sentencing guidelines for fraud ($400 million at the time)[0]. Also, many people lost their life savings and the fraud lasted for nearly 30 years and the judge didn’t feel that Madoff did everything he could to mitigate the harm caused by his actions.
The elements are different. Typically “conspiracy to commit X” requires some number of people agreeing to do X and then someone from the group doing at least one overt act in furtherance of that agreement. So you can be guilty of “conspiracy to commit X” without ever getting even remotely close to doing X.
So for example if two mates talk about that they are going to kill person Y, that is the agreement. And then one of them buys a gun, that is an overt act. And even if person Y has very good security, and the two dudes have no chance in hell of murdering Y ever, that is still a “conspiracy to muder” charge.
> So you can be guilty of “conspiracy to commit X” without ever getting even remotely close to doing X.
Probably most legal systems have something like that.
The interesting thing about US law - at least compared to German law (a Civil law country) - is the fact that even if you succeed with X, you can still be charged with conspiracy to commit X on top.
If I remember correctly, it has its roots in the RICO statutes which arose from FBI attempts to break up the mafia. The idea was to make it easier to prosecute people who did not actually pull the trigger but who were involved in planning and ordering of such crimes.
Now, a wiretap of a boss ordering a hit could result in the same sentence as the gunman.
Unfortunately it has been abused greatly, including drivers who never got out of the car sentenced to death for a 7/11 robbery gone bad, etc.
Further, as you can imagine, it gives the prosecution massive (many would say unfair) leverage over associates to a crime, given that they could face the same, full sentence if they don't cooperate. It's a major reason behind the enormous percentage of criminal charges not going to trial.
> Macroeconomic conditions have changed substantially this year. Despite being well-diversified across every category of financial services, we are seeing customers across the industry experiencing slower-than-expected growth.
sry for the stupid question, but does anyone have a good breakdown/video/article/explanation on the market change? I have some idea, but I'm not a pro.
Interest rates were increased by the federal reserve to ultimately try to increase unemployment to hopefully decrease inflation. This is working by increasing the cost of capital
You could, but that would be ignoring the federal reserves own statements about why they are doing this[1]. It’s not a conspiracy to think they are trying to raise the unemployment rate, they’ve been very open about it
Another FF fan hehe. Btw if you still play, FF14 online is a banger to enjoy some nostalgia. I'm having a great time at least :) About working, well Square Enix is always hiring, but you need to speak japanese. Their offices are in Tokyo if I am not mistaken.
I doubt I could learn to speak Japanese at this point, nor could I relocate because we already built a house and have a 1.5yo baby so options are limited :). Plus I was thinking about something smaller, not really an AAA studio because from what we here often working for these studios is a constant crunch, and that’s not what I’m really after.
I tried the free trial of FF14 and I enjoyed it briefly some time ago, but then they made a change that made it basically impossible to log in on the free account so I stopped.
I see. You definitely could learn japanese ... if you want to. If you don't want it's another story xD. In any case, about FF14, trial works still (I had no problems) and I recommend this client for Mac https://github.com/marzent/XIV-on-Mac - which is better than the official hehe.
I’ve finished Endwalker and the ending is one of the few stories that broke me. Really got me thinking about our place in the universe and our planet specifically.
Hello from Switzerland (I'm not swiss though). I am passionate about reducing the suicide rates in Japan (I'm not japanese though). To contribute the way I envision, I'm building a business (one man show) to fund this endeavor. Easier said than done. First it starts by covering my costs, then moving on to this ambition. It's a journey so gotta enjoy the day-to-day, so I am happy to do a business on what I love, which is cybersecurity. I just got started, but I am already all in :) wish me luck lol. As for why this mission .. gosh it's a book to explain, but in short I want to give back what I received all over the years. If you have ideas to contribute about Japan, please write to me. Info on profile. Peace and love :)
