To quote the book by Google software engineers, “Software engineering is programming integrated over time”.
Programming is writing code at one snapshot in time.
Software engineering is mapping that code backwards and forwards through time, making sure it works with what comes before and what comes after, in both technical and business aspects.
Check out "Uber is a bezzle" by Cory Doctorow. His allegation is this scheme:
1. Early VC funds are used to subsidize Uber rides at a loss to Uber.
2. The deep discounts made Uber attractive to drivers and customers.
3. Uber's soaring popularity attracts more investment in Uber stock.
4. Uber's early investors cash out. Society is harmed as later investors lose their money, Uber drivers who invested in vehicles can no longer get work, public transit ridership is hollowed out, etc.
I feel your pain. Two workarounds when Google gets it wrong are to put the term in quotation marks, or to enable Verbatim mode in the toolbelt. (I know various people have come up with ways to add "Google Verbatim" as a search engine option in their browser, or use a browser extension to make Verbatim enabled by default.)
Both of these options are disappointing, in my experience. Verbatim mode seems weirdly broken sometimes (maybe it's overly strict), and quoting things is rarely enough to convince Google that you really want to search for exactly that thing and not some totally different thing that it considers to be a synonym.
One porridge is too hot and the other is too cold. I know Google could find a happy compromise here if it wanted to. In fact, I bet there's some internal-only hacked-together version that works this way and actually gives an acceptable user experience for the kind of people who have shown up to this thread to show their dissatisfaction.
Try this, go to Google and type in "eggzackly this".
Two results not containing "eggz" at all.
Two results containing "eggzackly<punctuation>this"
Two results containing "eggzackly" but missing "this".
Google Search is broken. It no longer does what it's directed, it just takes a guess. I suspect part of this is because someone decided that "no results found" was the worst possible result a search engine could give.
Googling that with the brackets I get results containing "eggzackly this" ranked 3, 4, 6 (your comment) and 7 whereas the others contain just eggzackly (or with the 'this' preceded by punctuation as you mention).
Therefor I don't see how your last sentence is the explanation (there are results), I've also happened to land on no results found sometimes with overly precise quoted queries (for coding errors mostly IIRC). But it is annoying that it doesn't seem stricktly enforced even when you want it to.
I'm no political philosopher, but I'd say, for example, the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution says the government's purpose is to “promote the general welfare." Phenomena like bank runs harm the general welfare, so the government has an interest in preventing or mitigating them.
I agree that bank runs harm the general welfare, and the reason why we can make that claim is because of the material relationship between the banks and the general population, as individuals participating in the economic system in order to ensure their own welfare.
But if we look at other sorts of more complex financial instruments, the sort of thing that's inaccessible to an average citizen, then why are they protected by the state as well? The obvious answer would be "well, banks invest in complex financial instruments, and the state wants banks to be protected". But regulating financial instruments isn't necessarily the only way of ensuring that the banks' service to their customers remains stable, it's just one possible path.
This is correct. In this query, the '*' is being disregarded. Then, I assume, more people on the internet discuss 48 and 6 in the context of long division than in the context of multiplication.
I see what you're saying -- money isn't useful until it's spent. But I think the argument is that a wealthy person doesn't put that extra 98% of their money under a mattress, they invest it. Now they have passive income on top of their previous income, and their effective tax rate from sales tax is even lower. Until eventually they have so much well that they don't have to work at all, and neither do their descendants, and you have an aristocracy.
But, if such a system was in place, the money would be taxed during the purchase of the investment vehicle. A sale is a sale. Unless the money is literally stuck in a mattress, it is going to be taxed upon doing anything useful with it. If it is simply stuck in a mattress for all of eternity, one is really no further ahead. Money only has value when you can use it to facilitate a sale; and when there is a sale there would be a tax.
I appreciate the sentiment, but five hours?! That's your example of an acceptable low level of performance for someone working from home with a child with no possibility of childcare?
I'm splitting card of my toddler with my spouse, and on my BEST days, I get 3 hours of actual work done. 1.5 is more typical, and that's only because the toddler takes 2 hour naps.
Programming is writing code at one snapshot in time.
Software engineering is mapping that code backwards and forwards through time, making sure it works with what comes before and what comes after, in both technical and business aspects.