I haven't seen one but The Guardian's reporting does not agree with your abject dismissal:
> They look a lot like the 50-rupee notes: They carry a picture of Gandhi and are a similar colour.
FWIW if these need a moment of inspection, I would still say mixing such in a stack/pile of notes - typical of charities and donations - is still a vile act thats easy to pull. Technically, the ZR note becomes an instrument for siphoning or fraud.
Wherever loose money is collected in large quantities & sorted manually, money counters dont spend inordinate times to sift currencies. They are sorted by color. e.g. in major temples & churches. Places where petty stealing is also prevalent.
Be tolerant of counter views if they don't agree with yours.
> These exist and they're made by the government's anti corruption bodies.
I would love to see a source of this. Because as far as I am aware, making special "notes" by any agency, government or not, is just against the minting laws.
You are just confidently incorrect in your answers & resort to downvoting to views you don't like. Anti-corruption agencies (ACB EOW of CBI & ED of audits & account) in India use Potassium permanganate to dust the notes. The handprint of the accused are processed if they touch the notes. Usually recorded as pink stains on paper & dated with a magisterial witness.
> People who prefer golang use it _because_ it is verbose.
I don't prefer Go because it is verbose, error as values without constructs to manage them is a pain in the ass.
I'd use go over language X,Y or Z because of its standard library and ease of deployment. The language itself has great things but is verbosity, mainly when it comes to dealing with error C style, its absolutely not a feature.
Now that we have generics, things will get more interesting.
> Nothing is implicit and that makes good easy to read.
I mean this is a language with garbage collection, that thing certainly is implicit.
Coming from languages with exceptions, where you have no idea if a function call is going to explode without praying that the library has its exceptions documented or reading the source code, having error values that you cannot (easily) ignore is a blessing. It's not as good as something like Rust's Result sum type, but it's pretty close. It makes you explicitly handle, or bubble up, every error in your program which in my experience is a huge cause of unexpected exits in other languages.
This is me. I've been programming for decades, and the simplicity of Go appeals.
Projects like OP's just tell me that OP doesn't understand Go, and why Go was designed the way it was. They're trying to make this cool thing from another language (that they understand and know how to use) work in Go. But if they really understood the philosophy behind Go they wouldn't be doing this (and their life as a Go programmer would be a lot easier).
But then, I had the same experience coding in Rails. I hated all the magic, the "if you do this then Rails will automagically do that". I want my program to do something because I have specifically written it to do that thing. No surprises, no hidden layers of abstraction. Nothing implicit. I spent a lot of time fighting the magic and trying to write simple, verbose code in Rails. It wasn't fun.
I share your opinion overall especially the rails part
but let's not assume the intentions of the OP here. It's perfectly okay for someone to try and implement collections API using generics in go just to see if they could
Well yes, I was one of the haters back then because it was too verbose (for me). IMHO Go is less verbose than early Java.
It could be less verbose without loosing readability. My two top picks would be to add a ternary expression and a real while loop so that you could write better iterators.
while next := some.Next(); next != nil {
// ...
}
Such a while loop would be consistent with the if statement support for an assignment and following check.
From the start, the problem with these lab arguments was that they were made by people who had zero evidence. Making up a plausible story and speculations are not evidence.
The bottom line is we will never know, since China is not exactly a free country were potential eye witnesses can be interviewed freely. The market theory was always more likely and more dooming for China, though. It's easy to beef up the control of bio labs, it's way harder to close down all animal wet markets. Officially, China claims they have done the latter but I've heard that they continue to exist all over China.
Nobody asked people to take the lab leak theory at face value. If it's on shaky foundations, it could have been easily refuted. But the way in which it was supressed only added credence to the view.
I don't understand what you mean by "suppressed", I've seen countless mentions of the lab theories on HN, other social media, and news sites. These theories have been around from the start and have always been considered less likely than the wet market hypothesis, as the linked articles also argue. But even if you were right, you should never believe a theory just because it cannot be easily refuted or because you feel it is suppressed. It's trivial to come up with theories that are hard to refute or cannot be falsified at all. Theories can also be suppressed for all kinds of reasons that have no bearing on their truth. If there is a lack of positive evidence for a theory you need to remain agnostic or at the very least try to obtain realistic probability estimates.
Firstly, I would prefer if you didn't dictate what I should believe in and what I shouldn't. I'm fully capable of analysing the information that I have and form my own opinion and it's alright even if it turns out to be wrong.
Secondly, it was suppressed in the way that news media and Twitterati were labelling everyone considering this theory as a possibility to be racist because some racists they know also shared the same views.
It's the other way around. The problem with the natural development theory is there's no evidence for it. Meanwhile lots of evidence was discovered and collected by internet based investigators. At this point the overwhelming preponderance of evidence supports the idea that it came from the Wuhan lab.
"The market theory was always more likely and more dooming for China, though"
No, the most likely possibility from day 1 was that a novel coronavirus emerging right next to a lab doing experiments on novel coronaviruses came from that lab. It was always nonsensical to claim otherwise.
The current "moderation" is in line with their opinion and they don't want to imagine what will happen when that changes.
And YouTube gets no love because they also removed the dislike button (which is a much more robust way of moderation) because they didn't like the outcome
Perhaps if you dropped your arrogance you would realise that other people in the thread don't share your opinion and don't want to get the same message across more clearly?
You and YouTube seem to share the same sentiment that you somehow are smarter in every way than the said 30-40% of the population.
The problem is not that these people aren’t smart. It’s a good bet that they are. The problem is that they aren’t sufficiently benevolent. Their narratives are fundamentally optimized to benefit themselves first, and then others.
Free speech limits power and increases competition, which is the most effective way to decrease rent seekers.
And you don't need to do any research harder than reading history to see this in LBJ's prosecution of the Vietnam war with the "best and brightest" he inherited from JFK.
When will the egotistical narcissism stop? This type of “I’m better than you” talk is not acceptable when it comes to race, how come it’s acceptable when the subject is intelligence?
If we extrapolate this, these narcissists would be asking for an end to the Universal adult franchise and say that only the "properly informed" people should be allowed to vote.
I've heard this argument in my country already from certain circles
That’s also what YouTube viewers think. Not making a decision, is also making a decision. Develop your own news curation source and stop relying on a corporation to do it.
If that is too difficult, perhaps consider the challenge the news org faces.
Everyone makes bad decisions. While you are angry at YT for what they have removed, are you also praising them for each thing they did not action? If not, you are getting upset about a very small percentage. That may be valid for your own issues, but it does not make it representative
If you ever wonder why other humans don’t support your issue, and your issue is not representative, perhaps that is your answer to make more sense of things.
> If they specifically state they look for people in EU timezones they'll receive anyway 100+ CVs from India or other countries.
If they state EU _timezone_ and they receive applications from India which is *ahead* by 3.30H or Nigeria which is in about the same timezone, I don't see what the problem is.
If they want only people from Europe, they should just say so.
Also, the example I have provided are from 15 years ago, when I appeared for these exams. I'm not going to bother finding verifiable information from back then but the figures I mentioned are pretty much what I saw.
You and I are referring to completely different scores. It is true that a candidate needs to have scored a minimum percentage of around 50-60% in their high-school/intermediate board exams (so 10th/12th standard) to be allowed to sit in the selection examination.
The cutoffs I'm talking about are dependent on overall performance of all candidates. In the link I have shared this cutoff is 18% (89/480) for reserved category students. There are more details in the article about the cutoff for reserved category students being 60% of that of general category ones. There is further elaboration on how many students have to drop off because of their poor performance. These vacant seats are rarely filled.
Right, it is. Like I said, the figures I've pulled are from what I remember from 15 years back. Unfortunately I'm not able to find any sources with light searhcing.
I'd like to point out that there is a high possibility that there is an upward trend in reservation category cutoffs. And if it is indeed the case then I'd be the happiest.
This is from 2010-2012, when large scams mobilized common people against corruption in India.