which edition, because honestly i found Blandy book very little value in providing any explanation about rust beyond demonstrating page over page rust's equivalences in c++. it's just really a translation of c++ patterns into rust equivalences. no explanation, history, context about language design or idiomatic patterns from the host language. I don't know the history of The Book's date of publish/development vs blandy's book enough make this any more than a conjecture: it seems like blandy's book is a re-take on the book.
also, i am not saying The book is any good beyond a tour of the language. come to think of it, it's actually less like TC++PL or D&EC++, and more like the tour of c++.
Maybe the 2020 edition is better than the one i got from 2017 but if things aren't entirely different, basically rust to you is just a reapplication of C++ idiom for a language that targets a compiler which was historically developed to emit machine code based on c++ on the demands of cpp semantics?
In the thread, the @google account replied with the suggestion of going through an appeal process but the user already apparently appealed and it was denied. it would be very interesting to learn what were the given reasons for its denial.
A big problem with companies like Google is that they do not like to disclose their reasons for terminating or flagging accounts. It's probably a policy that's intended to stop people from figuring out what they watch for and gaming the system. But if the Twitter user legitimately did nothing wrong and really is out thousands of dollars, then he should seek legal council.
That's conflating disclosing what evidence Google used to determine the offense, and what the offense even was.
If someone was gaming the system, they'd already know which parts of the ToS they were breaking, so they'd gain no advantage from being informed of that again by Google.
How compatible is this with GDPR? It simply states the company is to hand over all data linked to a person.
The right to be informed
The right of access
The right to rectification
The right to erasure
The right to restrict processing
The right to data portability
The right to object
Rights in relation to automated decision making and profiling.
in cities where real estate is expensive and a premium, which pretty much is all metro cities in this world, this doesn't even tackle the real issue of the cost of paying for the space to store these cars. regardless of installing a solar panel strapped to a car lift, shopping centres, transit hubs, method of addressing the issue of parking space is by paying for space (also going up is't free or unrestricted in most jurisdictions).
I see your point but there is still usable space going up in many places. In NYC for example, many buildings have garages with open air space that could be used to provide more parking. The cost of the space doesn't change whether you are parking 1 car there or stacking up. Might as well utilize the space to give more cars access to parking as opposed to just using for a single vehicle.
It seems to be a way to record the path of readings you've through the bible. there might be a theological justification for doing this, and thus the reason why the webapp exist
You can think of it as tantamount to one's network, and the amount of influence within that network. Basically, "it's not what you know, it's who you know".
It's pretty rich to claim the who-you-know culture in China is not influenced by money. Bribery is how you get everything from good grades, to good employment, promotions, get out of jail etc.
if you really need someone to give you a breakdown + application of the idea of fungibility to bribes to see the distinction, here you go:
when you bribe a teacher for a better grade, you aren't utilizing a relationship to induce a change in outcome, you are utilizing money, money that holds value independent of who is providing the bribe.
edit:i am making the assumption that parent read at least the wiki blurb of what the parent is replying to.
Money helps you get to know people, particularly in China for things like getting grades and jobs. If, after you give them money, they then "know" you, money was still part of the equation.
