A lot of us in the Midwest say BFI, with I being Iowa. Think it has more to do with none of us wanting to be in Iowa.
omg do i hate that. especial those commentators who want to claim something was politically devastating when we all know no one gave a shit.
The engine is C++ and the game code is C#.
Karma police arrest this man
Godot is a great example. The vast majority of the code you write is single function, callback style procedures. Rarely are you creating a hierarchy of class interfaces or dealing with a large multifaceted infrastructure. You are writing what can be done in pretty mundane python.
Rather, C# is there to grab the Unity community and they only really use it because idiomatic Unity may have bigger projects creating engines. C# still follows the HelloWorld complexity property of programing languages.
So there is that story in Genesis where the sons of Jacob have an army of 318 men circumcised so they could follow their religion.
Just think they probably put then into a pile, a small little mountain of foreskins.
I think that is probably due to the places where it shrines isn't often a FOSS area. All my corporate use was for these massive windows applications. FOSS many times are small teams making very targeted solutions. Aside from Android, it feels like Java programmers are picking java out of personal skill. I don't known what apps I use would be a good target for C#.
most dictators are unalived before that happens.
It was all ad based, just you could pay it forward to the site themselves. The problem was that this clean generate any money due to no click through and the target audience wasn't marketable.
while I hate ads as much as everyone else what do you propose funds all the sites people use that are high in operating costs? I doubt many people will pay five bucks a month for every site they use. The internet will just be more retro, which I think would be fine.
I just think it includes Musk. He's an absolute dipshit, he isn't some mastermind pulling the strings.
I agree. But the major difference between Trump and Musk is that Musk has companies that are actually doing well because he was able to pick them up when they were heading in the right direction and allowed more competent people to actually do the business stuff. SpaceX does well, he has other people doing the real work. Twitter is a failure because he is doing it all himself. Tesla is only falling apart because Musk is getting in the way.
If he's bribing political scientists to say what he wants, I wouldn't exactly call them legitimate.
I'm saying he can actually hire people who are extremely good at this field of work. There are highly skilled economists and strategists and speech writers and analysts that will work for him if he pays them well enough. He can fund the whole political scene if he truly wanted to. Trump wants power and he only gets it when the Republicans are running the show. If Musk wanted to treat politics like how he "runs" SpaceX then he could do damage. But what we have seen so far, like in Wisconsin, was Musk treating it like Twitter.
Trump won just fine without Musk before, so why is Musk suddenly vital?
He is vital because Trump loses after he gets elected. He is a shit president and a shit business man and he is only good at playing up his abilities. We are seeing just how bad of a leader he is and the polls are showing that people are getting pissed off at utter lack of "winning" Trump always says we will have. I think Trump is going to need money and social media to make sure the Republicans don't lose the midterms as it could instantly make him an impotent president if there is a big in a year and a half.
But even more vital is how soon that fear starts to creep in for the Republican Party. Right now they are being told not to have town halls because everyone is out for blood. Once that sets in and they start realizing they need to change Trump is going to start losing control. For the House to right the ship would mean pushing back on his insane ideas. Musk can make that happen really quick if he wanted.
The PM's job is to stop those doing the project from getting derailed. Literally manage the project. This means holding the stakeholder's feet to the fire. If the steak holder agrees to the terms they need to accept the repercussions of changing requirements, and their own misunderstanding.
Bad PMs don't hold the line. They don't signal early when bad things may be coming soon. They let all the shit derail productivity.
This is why systems like Agile were created. By making derailment a ceremony it became acceptable to remove the onus of the stakeholder to really make sure the project is ready and worth it.
edit: i should read over my dictated comments a little better