Afghanistan

Yugoslavia

Before 98:

Libya

Panama

Iraq

Kuwait

Somalia

Bosnia

Iran

Sudan

Afghanistan

Before 88:

Korea

China

Guatemala

Indonesia

Cuba

Guatemala

Belgian Congo

Guatemala

Dominican Republic

Peru

Laos

Vietnam

Cambodia

Guatemala

Lebanon

Grenada

Libya

El Salvador

Nicaragua

Iran

Japan

Before Pearl Harbor:

Dominican Republic

Nicaragua

China

Mexico

Russia

Wow, that's a lot of bombs! Hope this helps.

Sometimes the answer to "why?" is that the dev had a hammer and the codebase was starting to look an awful lot like a nail. In-memory cache isn't considered as a serious option nearly enough imho.

https://github.com/chardet/chardet/issues/327

I don't know about the guy you're replying to, but I've made many mistakes in my coding life, and some of them more than once. The Date API is written in a way to obfuscate the real complexities of date and time management, so I find it quite easy to imagine someone stepping in the same footgun more than once.

EDIT: oh ew, grandparent comment is a bot. How did you recognize it?

Even if you build in a self destruction mechanism to landmines(1), this indiscriminate nature remains.

On top of that, you mention something about peppering cities with land mines not being ok (and it wouldn't be), but I'm not convinced that anyone's doing that. And still civilians make up 90% of the victims.

Of course, there's another thing playing into that 90% figure, which is that, by and large, mines are not very effective against military tartgets because they have ample means to dispose of them. Given the fact that our target here is Russia, and not some poorly funded guerilla outfit, I think this should be taken into consideration.

Pairing their war crimey nature and their low efficacy (2), I personally cannot get behind withdrawing from the Ottawa treaty.

There is much more to say about this, and much more has been said about this. I would recommend giving

https://www.humanity-inclusion.org.uk/en/landmines-can-no-lo...

a skim. They give alternative, more effective, less inhumane, solutions to the problems that mines try (and largely fail) to solve.

(1) Which is ultimately a bit of a hypothetical exercise, because the nations that left the treaty, well, left the treaty. They didn't propose an amendment allowing for temporary mines, they left the treaty. And on top of that the failure rate for such smart mines is like 20%. You get 1/5th of a war crime I guess.

(2) Earlier I said something to the effect of "I'm sure they're effective". At the time I hadn't read up on the actual effectiveness of mines, because to me, the effectiveness of a method plays no role in whether it should be allowed in combat. I've since read up on that part too, and I'm reasonably convinced they're not very effective in our current context.

There is not a single doubt in my mind that mines are useful. As are executions of people suspected of collaborating with the enemy. As is instituting precautionary concentration camps to round up folks who might have some bond with the enemy. The utility of dropping atom bombs on civilian centers is probably extremely high in negotiating with the enemy. But, like mines, these things are unconscionable, and when you start using these highly effective means, you should really ask yourself: "am I the good guy in this conflict?"

For me, the answer is no. I don't think we should commit war crimes, which somehow has become a controversial opinion.

Here's the first paragraph of Harry Potter and the philosopher's stone. I rewrote it from scratch, apparently:

Mr. and Mrs. Dursley, of number four, Privet Drive, were proud to say that they were perfectly normal, thank you very much. They were the last people you’d expect to be involved in anything strange or mysterious, because they just didn’t hold with such nonsense. Mr. Dursley was the director of a firm called Grunnings, which made drills. He was a big, beefy man with hardly any neck, although he did have a very large mustache.

This seems entirely backwards. Why spend money to optimize something that _isn't_ the bottleneck?

^ This report from 2020 analyzed about 50,000 IT projects in a wide range of market segments, and they found that 50% exceeded their deadline. This seems to suggest that your conclusion holds more generally than just your specific context.

On a personal level, I hardly ever see a developer's estimate turn out to be right, on whatever scale. I'm wondering what the pro estimate folks in this thread work on that they're able to estimate accurately.

> London is no longer the city I was infatuated with in the late ’90s and early 2000s. _Chiefly because it’s no longer full of native Brits_. In 2000, more than sixty percent of the city were native Brits. By 2024, that had dropped to about a third. A statistic as evident as day when you walk the streets of London now.

Here it clear that the thing you refer to as majority culture, DHH refers to as "native Brit". So what majority culture is he talking about that dropped from about 60 to about 30% in that time? Helpfully, DHH links to a wikipedia page on the ethnic makeup of London to clarify his point. The group that dropped from 60 to 30 is that of native white Brits. So the majority culture he's explicitly referring to is that of native white Brits. Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.