I'm not sure. Cities are supposed to approve or deny applications based on whether they comply with zoning, codes, parking, water availability etc. They can't deny based on who or what the business is alone. A city near me is dealing with a lawsuit for exactly that.

It probably varies from state to state, I don't know.

Cities can largely do what they want. They can deny applications for whatever reason they want. Citizen concerns are very important here (they need to keep voters happy to keep their jobs). But their main mandate is to protect the public good. If a project isn’t in the interest of their community, they ca deny it.

Whether or not it’s legal is another question. And NIMBY and… and… there are lots of potential concerns. But this article is about Wisconsin, where the question is really what are we going to do with this land and how are going to power it.

Your post mentions a lawsuit near you. This is a feature, not a bug. Even if the city is unlawfully denying an application, the denial still has the desired effect — a de facto denial for the length of time it takes to resolve in the courts. By dragging out the time for a lawsuit to be resolved, the city hopes that the developer will just go away and find someplace else.

This is in the context of not knowing the entity behind the application, and evaluating it on its merits alone. I'm not convinced that's a bad thing. Kindof like evaluating a resume without knowing the name or gender of the applicant.

Cities are bound by laws, and not complying opens them up to lawsuits which the taxpayers pay for. Sure, maybe that's in the best interest of the community in some cases. However, I think it usually happens because people have feelings and biases rather than as a calculated move.

> evaluating it on its merits alone

It’s evaluating proposal by the words of the applicant alone.

In addition to exaggeration on resumes, people tend to not include inconvenient stuff. Reputation is definitely part of the merit.

> They can't deny based on who or what the business is alone

They absolutely can and do this. Ask to put an adult entertainment store next to a school/church. Ask to put a liquor store next to a school/church. The city will say no.

Right, because zoning and state laws forbid those things.

That's probably a zoning issue, though..

I've been playing them for 35 years and I don't share your opinion at all.

> between a federal officer and a suspect

The "suspect" being the person standing alone who was sent flying backwards whens an officer approached and shoved with both hands? Why was that justified? Was that an "arrest" or physical assault?

The whole thing was completely unnecessary.

Notepad was basically the "Hello world" of win32 apps. A kid in highschool could have "maintained" it.

> mostly at the same time

Mostly? If you can update A one week and B the next week with no breakage in between, that seems pretty independent.

This was also the case for the micro-service situation described in the article. From the FA:

> Over time, the versions of these shared libraries began to diverge across the different destination codebases.

I don't see the problem?

There's at least one employee per micro service so there should be zero problems preventing just bumping the version of the library.

This Segment team was 3 people and 140 services. Microservices are best at solving org coordination issues where teams step on each other. This is a case of a team stepping on itself.

From the author's comment up thread:

"when they learnt to run on the ball and how that influences their reward, they got hooked. I believe they enjoy not just the reward, they get a sense of how their actions influence the game and they like that. They would run on the ball so much at some point they wouldn't even bother drinking all the juice and it was just dripping on the setup."

Same for me. It has led to some awkward moments in public where it looks like I'm staring at someone from across the room, but I'm just thinking/visualizing and am only vaguely aware of what my eyes are looking at.

AFAIK only if you are booked into jail, and also for some licenses. For example, a beer and wine license for a restaurant requires fingerprints, at least in my state, not sure how it varies. Probably some types of firearm licenses as well. Not typical driver's licenses though.

What the... Is this some sort of joke I'm not getting?

"The participants who did ultimately enroll, agreed with the knowledge that the aircraft were stationary and on the ground."

It's gently reminding medical researchers not to forget about participation bias (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participation_bias).

Another favorite of mine along these lines is "Cigarette smoking: an underused tool in high-performance endurance training". (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3001541/) This one might actually be quite pertinent in this case, because the FDA's decision appears to rely heavily on exactly the kind of reasoning that this article satirizes.

It's a multilayered joke.

There's an old joke about the lack of randomized controlled trials for parachutes. The joke is deployed when people complain about the lack of formal studies for things whose benefit is obvious.

Then somebody went ahead and did it, just to be funny. But you can't actually do a randomized controlled trial on parachutes, so you get a third layer of joke, about studies that don't actually prove anything.

As a side note, I've seen it mentioned when discussing the common question of "why no parachutes on commercial flights?".

The question has relatively simple answers and it's sometimes used in risk management discussions to explain threat models.

If you put measures in place to prevent someone from accessing a computer, and they circumvent those measures, is that not a criminal offense in some jurisdictions?