ry_ry

As a layman (please humour me, I realise this could be a daft question) is failure to report results generally a sign of anything relating to the outcome, or is it equally likely to be something mundane?

I get that you were being deliberately a wee bit provocative, but If you honestly believed that of every manager you had, you would have been a horrible co-worker.

And if the system works sans-ethics, is that a problem beyond moralistic gatekeeping?

Since the main objection in the article was the military coopting the practice - The basic tenants of mindfulness, as I understand them, are not anybody's property - no matter how compelling the publisher's advances are.

And let's be honest with ourselves - the stationary and toilet paper the military buy have the implicit eventual aim of making them better at making things dead. I'm not convinced mindfulness training for troops is the problem here.

Sure, there are rogue teachers, but that has applied to everything from spurious gurus through to homebrew religions. At trial of sounding callous, caveat emptor surely?

Nothing Mindfulness (as a brand) teaches is a super-secret arcane mystery fercryinoutloud! If nothing else, the government spending time and money on it can only do wonders to validate it and cement it in the public conscious.

That's a disingenuous comparison.

How long did they wait before publishing? We don't know, it doesn't matter. Simply stating that they didn't respond had the desired effect, and - as you rightly pointed out - does nothing to diffuse the story. The implication of the story being that not only are Google potentially taking advantage of vulnerable people to further their unspoken, morally grey agenda, but it may also have a racially questionable angle.

Alternately, they wanted to train their facial recognition dataset with certain characteristics on the cheap.

That in itself is interesting, but probably wouldn't get as many clicks. It's bottom drawer "I leave you, dear reader, to draw your own conclusions" stuff.

Doesn't matter, I suspect - It works within the narrative and implies they have something to hide. It's good /tabloid/ journalism, and poor investigative journalism.

Randstad are very much the former.

Depends if the whole industry decides to take advantage of the opportunity to increase prices and blame the cost of oil or not.

It's the prisoners' dilemma, but applied to exploiting consumers!

Yeah, the search vs shop tension is the big question.

The difference being that Google are ostensibly a search engine, who are looking to monetize and leverage their ubiquity - Amazon are a book store grown to titanic proportions looking to maximize profits.

The same, but different.

I fully support Amazon's divergent empire being broken up into sperate companies, but for the moment Amazon.com - the online marketplace - is still an internet shopfront.

Is this an advert?

I think their point is simply that "it's their store" - and to be brutally honest, I agree.

Two not-entirely-random examples of similar behaviour:

Supermarkets place their own brand merchandise where they feel it'll sell best. Undeniably good business, and certainly no reason for concern.

Perhaps more questionably, but bare with me - Google place AMP content, which is to say content they have made their product by merit of some ToS/caching slight of hand, front and center. Is it exactly the same as what Amazon are doing? Well, no. Is it placing content they want consumed above other content irrespective of merit or consumer benefit? Probably.

Similarly Amazon are doing what businesses do and promoting their most profitable products, straddling both the above examples. Whether it's best for the customers is open to debate, but it doesn't change that it's entirety their prerogative.

Realistically for companies rolling their own managers, it should be a gradual multi-year process.

Initially mentoring less experienced developers, then into running a small team, scaling up the managerial aspects and learning to let go of the code, hire great people and trust them to deliver over time.

The modern industry moves faster than that, new roles are machine gunned into our inboxes, we are told you can't stand still or you're hurting your own career.

Those aren't mutually exclusive situations, but it's certainly made more difficult by their orthogonality.

To what degree are patents like this respected and/or enforced in China?

My favourite Easter egg: <marquee> still works in Chrome.

At least I hope it's an Easter egg, and not left in to provide legacy support ;)

I was suprised the degree to which selector performance is a negligible overhead in normal use these days.

Was browsing through the docs for some Vue+CSS library or another recently, and the author had done quite a lot of research into this, was interesting.

They were heavily using the square bracket html-attribute selector notation, although I'm not sure if it performs better now, or if modern processors are just that much faster.