9point6

Big thanks for providing this extra context, that made it a lot clearer for me

Becomes?

Yes, silly engineers that don't like being held to unrealistic estimates and deadlines; typically the ones that arise at the start of a project where there are still who-knows-how-many unknowns to find.

Waterfall is the most effective tool for software engineering in a world where the whole world stops once you've planned and only starts again once the project has finished—i.e. a fictional world that doesn't exist. Literally every waterfall project I worked on back in the old days was derailed because something happened that wasn't planned for—because planning for everything up front is impossible and planning for anything more than a handful of eventualities is impractical.

Agile and subsequent methodology comes from realising that requirements will change and that you are better off accepting that fact at the time than having to face it once you're at the end of the current road.

Agile does not mean engineers talking continuously to the users, engineers are hired to do what they're good at: engineering. Understanding user requirements and turning that into a plan has always been product's job regardless of methodology, in agile and similar it's just spread out over the duration of the project, not front loaded. Agile isn't "make the engineers do every proficiency".

Well TBF, the country was generally regarded as pretty reliable until recent events.

Gonna need some crazy subsidies to combat the economies of scale of the entrenched providers though. The capex of getting a cloud data center even up and running is crazy without the fact that the market leaders are working with razor thin margins

It's both.

All he wants is the money, Putin is happy to prop him up in exchange for his own goals

There's probably also the shady kompromat shit going on too as the stick to the carrot. But trump is only where he is because of greed.

They did those starter sku users dirty

But yeah this was Microsoft's strategy for a while (and may still be): they attempted to push small business users to their server products for running servers by limiting the ram and core counts on the non-server skus.

ps aux to list your processes

kill 1234 to ask PID 1234 to stop nicely

kill -9 1234 to kill it

You might need a sudo in there if the process is running as another user

A software engineer was not involved in this if waterfall is painted positively.

I think the last time I heard an engineer unironically advocating for a waterfall IRL was about a decade ago and they were the one of the crab-in-a-bucket, I-refuse-to-learn-anything-new types—with that being the very obvious motivation for their push-back.

You get used to it, I don't even see the code—I just see: group... pattern... read-ahead...

Firstly it's a fraction of a percent of the pool of people working as entertainers that get paid anything close to a comfortable salary—many don't even last a few years and make basically nothing before they change careers.

The successful ones get paid a load basically because the people that invest in funding TV shows & films know that you can generally multiply your investment by attaching a household name to the project. Now this is for several reasons, firstly a household name will generally actually be a good actor. Secondly, people recognising a member of your cast means they're generally more likely to watch it. Finally, there's the effect on the rest of the casting—some studios might take the opportunity to push the compensation of the "no-name" actors down because they have an opportunity to work with a star, others might go the other way and use the first star in negotiations to get additional starts signed on to the project.

So essentially, the big projects make a lot of money, and executives attribute a significant part of that generated value to having the big star involved, and so they portion the funding to ensure that happens.

There's also the negotiation factor on long running shows, main characters end up in good negotiation positions for more money if a show is successful and their character isn't easy to kill off. This is also why Netflix tries to cancel stuff before the 3rd season—that's about the point who holds the power in negotiations shifts away from the studio.

An in-demand actor is a finite resource, they can only really work on one or two projects at any given time, so this also pushes their fees up as projects may end up in bidding wars. Conversely most entertainment costs very little to sell beyond the initial production costs, so after that's broken even it's free profit they can use for these fees.

Tl;dr capitalism

I was about to say, this is the 2nd threat I've read about in 6 months.

Who did these trees piss off

I see feddit.uk and "Metrolink" and I become very concerned about the one I use fairly regularly

I'm pleased to discover this is over the Atlantic from me