How is there not a single marker in Ukraine? UAF are using every kind of equipment they manage, I have certainly seen in the media DJI drones being used there.
DJI are keen to distance themselves from the situation in Ukraine. Despite the enormous number of DJI drones being used in the conflict, DJI have officially prohibited the sale of their drones to Ukraine or Russia.
As far as Stallman's choices of what to debate, and how, and where are concerned.
The problem that is being raised here is with the ethics of those who smear an individual's reputation while refusing to admit they were wrong and knowing full well that it is impossible to undo the damage even if they did, and of those who end up supporting the former by shunning that individual.
People always did, especially the smart ones like Stallman. His blog literally consists of his provocative takes on various issues. Thinking results in having an argumentation for one's actions. That argumentation might be wrong, and the person could change their views when presented with evidence. If you never overlook blunders and allow to self-correct, you are discouraging original thinking.
I mostly knew it for Simon Ostrovsky in eastern Ukraine. In the recent years it has seemingly become more politically biased like many other papers, so I stopped paying attention - it simply did not stand out anymore.
No matter how grass-roots you imagine journalism to be on the path of becoming I believe it will end up resettling into a specialized organization, because it requires cross-domain research, an ability to vulgarize, and an ability to investigate and witness events, better than any of the individuals and organizations you listed.
Buzzfeed news had great investigative journalism. Sure it was reputation washing for the rest of the site, but I don't think that makes its content bad.
I am really tired of dirt being brought up each time a discussion of a renowned figure is happening. It obviously detracts from the inspiration or immersion people are trying to derive from bringing up those renowned figures. They are intentionally focusing on the positive aspects, and those who are bringing the garbage up are intentionally detracting from it.
You think there's a problem reminding readers that venerated people aren't good role models? Why? Why not strive to be better than them, intentionally moving past their flaws?
I think that attitude would be great, but that isn't what I see happening. There is a widespread movement to cancel basically all famous historical figures, and dismiss the value of their work along with discrediting their personalities. It's frustrating to see, since many of these people were really inspiring to me as a kid, making me want to be a scientist/engineer myself.
Sounds really weird because you still have to screen people for software engineering jobs, while administering problems in an in-person interview is how it was being always done before coding competition platforms.
As to the platforms themselves, they are still usable for in-person interviews and practice.
I am trying this approach right now. It is difficult to do it for big concepts because they take time to recall in their entirety and can't be reduced to one key idea to be recalled quickly. It may also be hard to estimate what interval to use, and bloated repetition sessions are killing the whole idea of spending some 10s of minutes a day, causing a sort of fatigue if not outright burnout.
