How do these work? Is it like going to the tiny settings menu and swapping the source on a monitor? I know the HDMI standard includes a way for an input to "request" a source to switch to it, are monitors with multiple inputs smarter about that sort of thing?
Yes, go to the monitor's settings menu and swap the source. Takes only a couple of seconds with practice at least for the Dell models that I use. Their UI has switching source as a top level option, probably because of the large number of inputs they have. You can check the user manual for the monitor to verify the complexity before purchasing.
My work device is a Chromebook unfortunately and the policy on installing some of this stuff on it (e.g. also Mouses without Borders) is no good.
Maybe part of the reason this problem is less common than I'd imagine is because companies are not typically as strict on what you install on your work machine? My last job certainly was.
I would have thought ensuring that workers at google, getting absolutely no special access to specific other accounts, is pretty much the most sacrosanct rule.
i.e. Google's unlikely to hand over the dossier they've assembled on 'what your husband has been up to that we considered bad enough to shut down their account'
Most definitely not saying this isn't a false positive - but the handling process for it it must assume it's a positive.
Now why the poster's husband can't get the info - that is somewhat worrysome.
- it's weird to be mistreated by your employer's own product (just the irony bend to it)
- if you want to appeal after a dead end, your choice is to make a huge public PR nightmare, or try to make an internal post/plea that gains traction. you'd be doing your own employer a service if you could have this issue resolved without a PR nightmare
I guess Google's ToS is between the employee's husband and Google and not the employee, the employee's husband, and Google. So there is no authorization for some random employee to "check up" on their partner, even though it sounds like escalating internally should help. (It should at least trigger, "we'd better look into this very carefully", though. If it didn't, that sounds like a problem. If it did, and the result is "yeah, this is legit", that's a very awkward position for everyone.)
I was in a similar situation when I worked at Google. My brother kind of disappeared, and my family asked if we could at least check if he logged into Gmail. I asked and was told no, and I understood why -- it's up to my brother to share what he's up to, not Google. (My brother was fine; just didn't like replying to email or answering his phone.)
I don't think it was a rule before, and I don't think it should be a rule now. This is missing an important opportunity to debug the process, since you have a separate way of finding out what's going on.
If you're not going to use that data when you get an opportunity like this to fix something, what's dogfooding and "trusted testers" all about?
It's sticking in your head in the sand out of a misguided attempt at being unbiased, instead of fixing things.
When i worked there i got my blocked payment acc unblocked with an apology pretty easily. I cant recommend using google payments (or anything other than gmail) anymore though
Someone posted a video on YouTube showing them bullying and humiliating one of my friends. I helped her report it. YouTube ignored it. I worked at Google at the time. I filed an internal ticket and YouTube ignored that, too. Years later, the video is still online.
Companies serve the shareholders. Shareholders want to spend as little money as possible on user support. I think new regulations are a good way to solve this problem for everyone. US consumer protection laws need updating for the Internet age.
That's why you should have email on your own domain. If they lock you out you can quickly-ish migrate to a different provider without losing your email address. Not a solution but definitely softens the blow.
That is my arrangement and I've had it in place so long I don't even have to pay the $5, I have a free private GSuite on my own domain (yes they offered this to everyone 10+ years ago). What I realized today though while reading this story, is that my DNS account is backed by this same GMail account. What if I'm attacked and someone locks out my DNS account at the same time they take the sort of criminal actions in my account that that would get Google to shut it down? I could lose my domain and all my email forever. I think I'm moving to Fastmail.
i actually think it's useful to create a flow graph of all your most critical accounts, and how you might recover them if lost.
If you find many of them flow back to an account you cant control and may be shut down for arbitrary reasons, may want to reconsider your recovery/hierarchy.
yeah I have ProtonMail with 2 custom domains. It's decent I have gotten blocked from sending emails to Google custom domains. Total bullshit IMO, I think they do it on purpose.
Well IMO it kinda makes sense that internally of all places you might actually make it hard to address it along that specific path to avoid any kinda of local shenanigans.
Gatsby doesn't offer a syntax highlighter out of the box. It has markdown (and MDX) components that generate pages, and those in turn can have syntax highlighting plugins. AFAICT prismjs indeed is the predominant one used by Gatsby sites (at least, in mine). But thanks to SSR prismjs will typically run at compile time.
Thank you! I'll bookmark this comment as I'm trying to take stock of what would be most helpful.
There are two kind of opposing directions I see a need for:
- "Beginner Unity" take tailored for an Engineer. E.g. let's talk about the input system, frame-rate independence, overview of rendering/lighting, a high level overview of the editor, etc. And get that out of the way.
- Satisfying what I might call a thirst for idioms/best practices from a SWE perspective. E.g. separation of concerns in MonoBehaviors, using ScriptableObjects, etc. Also maybe overview of things like "Should I still use Git with Unity or look into Collaborate?" and the like.
My current sense is that I'll end up toeing the line between these two. But, regardless of this specific series, I enjoy writing about best practices and software patterns in anything I'm working on, and Unity is no exception -- so stay tuned!
I'm with you there, but (and, this is an unpopular opinion) I think it would be even better if it went the way of Go. Go will randomize iteration order of unordered collections (at least in development builds?) on purpose so you learn not depend on it. The "tricky" thing with Unity is that you might find a consistent client behavior and unknowingly depend on it.
I think with time/experience you'll learn to spot what to ignore (frame lengths, etc) and what you could count on. And just to test fully-build games often, and across clients.
* C# does something similar with hash across builds (so you don't depend on serializing/deserializing hashes and expect them to work; they want the freedom to change hash functions).
Go doesn't randomise map order, it's just indeterminate. It picks a lot random bucket to start the iteration but the order will always be the same in the end (at least when I last investigated it). It's essentially free, so it does it in production too
Instructions of a "God" game object, try a ScriptableObject! But you're right cross object communication is tough.
I end up relying on asset-ized SOs to do a lot of this. When communication between any two nodes is mostly one directional, events and triggers work great. (Ryan Hipple has a great talk on this, just search for "Ryan Hipple ScriptableObject".
Maybe a less intense example here is, for example, custom shaders. You can get better terrain systems that do exactly what you want, etc from the Unity asset store.
Especially for a software engineer, there's of course always the fantasy of coding everything on your own. I might not get a platformer system because that seems "fun" to implement, but shaders often feel so beyond me that I'd just rather get someone's optimized shader.
Unity is unlikely to unseat Unreal as the primary engine used by AAA games/movies, but it still has a decent share in both AAA games and movies.
Still, the game engine market is unlikely to be dominated by a single player anytime soon. I think you'll continue to see something that looks rather similar to the mobile OS space: lots of players, but ~2 dominate the space. Unreal's revenue cut is also a lot more prohibitive than Unity's, so you'll also keep seeing a healthy indie ecosystem (which translates to a community, assets, etc.) in Unity.
A lot of Unreal's recent investments are incredibly impressive. Especially with better rendering and realtime raytracing. But Unity is also making some big investments, DOTS (see https://unity.com/megacity for example) comes to mind in particular.
I'm pretty sure Unreal changed their cut to nothing until you hit $1mil revenue, which seems pretty sweet. Unless you're taking that into account already.
