If your program integrates with mysql in production, you can use this for much faster local tests. It doesn't have to be a go program, although that makes it easier.
If you want to run arbitrary queries on structured data then SQL is a good language to do it in. This library gives you the opportunity to build such a SQL layer on top of your own custom structured data sources, whatever they may be.
How can Tesla be liable for this? You should not trust software to drive your car without human intervention.
I don't understand the US culture where everyone is entitled to sue everyone.
Short answer is that the U.S. relies on litigation to fill the void left by a lack of regulation. Tesla wouldn't be liable for this in Europe because they're not even allowed to sell this technology there in the first place:
I hate to be that guy, but Apple built their own platform and they can bend the rules as they see fit.
Spotify should just quit said platform if they don't like the rules and ask their "fans" to follow them over to other platforms. I know this is not likely to happen but, oh boy, what a move. Let's all jump into the water and let the Apple platform be an Apple service ghost town.
On the other hand I do want to see Apple slapped on the hand by the European Commission and level the ground for all developers, specially indie ones.
I love the following comment because it begs the question: Where do we draw the line? When do we, as a society, stop contemplating every single person special needs? When do we stop the "everyone is a snowflake" mentality?
"Very disappointing. The most stupid change ever made. I found the new color offensive to me and many i know so change it to another color".
Also the question: on who does the responsibility to be tolerant and understanding lie in such a situation? Is it our responsibility to change green hats to blue, or their responsibility to understand that not everyone sees any negative connotations with green hats? I think in this case, where there is absolutely no protected class being victimised (cuckolds are surely not a protected class), it should not be changed.
Both. And with fix being so easy and self-contained, it shouldn't even trigger any discussion. You just fix it and are done with it.
If fixing it meant more work, like redesigning all of the artwork, then you can ask the other side to be tolerant and understanding. In this case, there was no need to.
I agree the pragmatic thing to do is just to change it, but how much work the fix requires is not really the point here. We're talking about something more than what is simply the optimal business decision. I think it's wrong to indulge people's prejudices.
We simply don't, because why would we. Of course the effort to benefit ratio has to be considered, but in many cases, like this one, fixes are actually trivial. The only thing that really needs to be ignored is awful trolling, like the one you quoted.
Changing the hat's color is such a non-issue that it's really pathetic that there's actually a discussion about it.
This does make people ask that question, but looked at from another way, if they have have the possibility of offending a totality of the largest market in the world, does that really fit into this question. It's more like an extreme example to show that sometimes a trivial change would have a large effect.
I am glad to see an American stating the following:
>If we peremptorily strike country X, why shouldn't country X have a right to do the same to us, and to our children and grandchildren in future years?
