Les américains sont particulièrement souriant et courtois je dirais. Les gens n’aiment surtout pas leurs politiques, mais ils sont de bon touristes. Il y a quelques nationalités qui me viennent en tête qui sont carément détestés partout ou ils vont. Je ne pense pas qu’on est à ce point la pour les francais et les américains.
Je dirais que ce sont les parisiens qui ont mauvaise réputation, du moins par ici ils sont un peu mal vus. Je sais pas à quel point la distinction est universelle.
Selon les anglais:
Protéger le français c’est de la xénophobie.
Si la culture francophone ne survie pas de ses propres mérites (e.g: sans loi), elle ne mérite pas d’être préservée.
Parler en anglais partout, au travaille, en publique, dès qu’il y a un anglo à porté ce n’est pas suffisant. Faudrait qu’absolument tous les services soient disponibles en anglais. Parce ce que…
C’est innaceptable pour un anglophone qu’un petit bout de terre sur le continent ne respecte pas leur privilège. Les francophones qu’ils n’ont nul part d’autre à aller qu’ils aillent chier, on va quand même pas apprendre à parler deux langues.
Si le Québec se fait assimiler, c’est finis pour toujours le Français en Amérique. Mais c’est étrangement compliqué pour les anglais de comprendre la situation un peu unique du Québec, étant encerclé par littéralement une seule langue. Mais après, quand je vois comment ils traitent n’importe qui d’autre ne parlant pas anglais, je comprend que ce n’est pas unique à comment ils traitent le Québec.
Désolé pour les fautes, ça fait des années que ma vie est an anglais ici. La dernière fois ou j’ai pu parler et écrire en français au travaille c’était en 2020 avant qu’un employé anglophone rejoigne mon équipe. Speak white!
Yep, it is mostly apparent in big companies I would say. I could go on and on, but basically your work is so disconnected from the final output that what end up actually “mattering” is a bunch of made-up bullshit. Putting in quality work and improving your product/service does not benefit most of the people you interact with directly, unless of course you’re working on the popular thing that will get people promoted.
Anyways, I also left the corporate world to start my own business. Life is so much easier when all you need to care about is the quality of your work and not political points. I like my hard work to rewards me, and not just some guy spending his days in meetings claiming credit for “his” “initiatives”. Some of those folks would never survive a job that isn’t a mega corp paying them to improv all day in meetings.
I also think so. You can usually tell who is close to your own level, but anything too far off andthe signals for what is considered smart or dumb tend to blend together.
The one trait which usually don’t lie is the person ability to learn. Fast learners and autodidacts are almost always smart, and people who are slow to learn are almost always left of the curve. Other signals you mentioned are deeply rooted in culture and can reqlly give the wrong impression.
Removing bias from IQ tests is one hell of a challenge, but if we put that aside and only analyse IQ results from people from similar backgrounds, it definitely measure something, and it usually gives accurate results. Meaning your score would not change much by taking the test again.
IQ score correlate with someone general ability in pattern recognition, languages, logic, bias check and etc. It also correlate with grades, salary, lifespan. So, is that intelligence? I don’t know, but it is something.
I’d argue given enough time and effort almost anyone can become a domain expert in specific things and do incredible stuff. What distinguishes smart people from simpler folks usually boils down to them having a very easy time processing new stuff, which includes the ability to filter noise and fact check.
I don’t like the term “stupid”, but there hasn’t been a whole lot of evidence supporting the idea that human intelligence is compartimented. Humans with high IQs tend to outperform in average at most of what they try. Low IQ probably means you will work harder and have to specialize to achieve the same degree of competency. This just my hot take, I’ve fallen into this rabbit hole before and read a lot on the origin of IQs tests. In the end, intelligence alone does not determine a person’s worth anyway.
IQ tests were first developped because it seemed obvious not all students performed equally. On average a student that is good in a given discipline will also tend to do well in other unrelated disciplines. On average is the keyword here, outliers exist.
I think gifted students can easily tell what side of the curve they’re on, even though they might not want to acknowledge it. It is not even avout the grades, because gifted students also often learn early on that they can get away by doing the minimum amount of work and still get passing grades. So they’re not necessarily top of classes.
Gifted students get told they’re fast learner all the time, and they notice how everyone else seem to be progressing in slow motion. They know.
I think it gets harder to self-evaluate the closer you are to the average, since most of your peers will be more or less just as intelligent as you. Then, the dullest you are, and the less you can identify competense and the more likely you are to be over-confident.
I think in the end, most people will end up believing they’re above average because we tend to notice dumb people a lot. Ironically it is probably students who are just slightly above average who will have the most self-doubts, because they feel different from their peers, yet they can probably tell more gifted students are around.
Source: 50% my ass, 50% being surrounded by incredibly smart people who shared their personal experiences with me.
It is funny because it is the opposite actually. Former senates and presidents actually clashed over foreign policies, it is only in recent times that presidents were more or less left to decide. So, I guess there is a bit of projection going on here.
Congress has the power to declare war. The president being commander-in-chief does not mean he can do whatever he please with the U.S army as its own personal force. The president is meant to follow the constitution, even as commander. If the president ignores treaties and war declarations, I would argue the president is the one violating the separation of powers, and not congress by hypothetically enforcing the powers given to them by the constitution. By this logic, whoever controller the army should have absolute power, being commander-in-chief and all. I like how you slipped past my initial post by completely ignoring that the constitution grants congress influence over foreign policies by citing the president control over the armed forces as this unalienable right. Why have treaties then? Why have declaration of war? I think you might be slightly biased in your argument. The president was never the sole responsible for foreign policies, even though the executive branch had a lot of influence over those in recent times.
Article II section 2 of the constitution requires approval from the senate to ratify treaties, which is then up to the president to ratify and implement. Both branches of the government are supposed to work together to establish foreign policies, this is part of the check and balances. If you have sources interpreting article II section 2 differently I’d be curious to see.
I’ve been told the cat thing twice in my life, in both cases I ended up cutting contact years later because both persons turned out to be borderline sociopaths. Truth is we can’t really be sure for most animals, but to immediately assume most animals can’t feel shit is such a stretch.
The only thing that is more water than water, Cors light. But now, really I’d prefer to drink my own piss, since coincidentally enough, Cors Light is also one of the few liquid that is more piss than piss.
4 or 5 swarms of humans.
I just did, yes I’d care as much. Thanks for the bias check 👍
I’ve seen this play out a couple time. I agree about a lot of what you said and this is indeed true that you can have very senior and very knowledgeable devs basically “hack” or “bulldoze” their way into a backlog, I would personally argue that this is not a decent or desirable behavior.
There is no such thing as “small finition”. Making sure that a change or a feature works all the way through is not finition, it is core to the task, and you can’t expect someone else to digest and do the latter half of the work without being in your head.
I guess I am too lazy to type out all the examples with the downfall, but basically if you allow this, you will be shielding a senior from his own butched work, and lets be honest, most people who do this skip the “boring” work for their own selfish reasons. If they want to split the task and have you fix the tests, have them spell it out and justify it.
Management might not understand what is going on, all they might see is a superstar flying through the backlog, while everyone else struggle because they’re constantly fixing this guy’s shit. This rarely lead to good engineering, or team dynamic, or team management, and of course you end up with this one guy claiming credit for so much shit, while other team members stagnate. Unfortunately appearance is a thing in dev work, as much as I wish it wasn’t.
I don’t know about the former, but yes to the latter.
I don’t know about the former, but yes to the later.
What you seem to be describing is one big class with lots of responsabilities, and not circular dependency. Personally, I don’t think it is ideal, and I don’t know about your specific case so I could be wrong, but I have never seen a legit case for bloated classes. That being said, making a big class is still much better than splitting it into inter-dependant classes. Classes that know each other are so cohesive that they might as well be the same class anyway.
To add onto the circular dependency problem, it is not just about readability and cognitive load (though there is some of that), but cyclic dependencies actively break things, and make it much harder to manage the lifecycle of a program. No dependency injection, poor memory management, long compile times. It is a huge hack, and I understand that you think it can be the proper solution sometime, but it is really just a bad thing to do, and it will bite you some day. And I am assuming here that you’re using a language that is friendly, in some languages you won’t even compile past a certain point, and good luck cleaning up that mess.
“Moral enough”, let’s not pretend they’re not thirsting for their own genocide, just read their catchphrase “God Is the Greatest, Death to America, Death to Israel, A Curse Upon the Jews, Victory to Islam”".
Two wrongs does not make a right.