The difference is temporal: tip is for a "past" already rendered product or service. Sbf, Holmes, et al, it's about a promise for "future" services, which have a risk associated of no delivery or render. When you've already eaten your burger there was no risk of uncertain delivery. The causal relationship is reversed
True generally, but it gets murkier all the time. Just last week I ate at a traditional restaurant that stated up front that there is a 15% service charge on all checks. This was in a city that has a very high minimum wage even for tipped employees. More traditionally, parties of a certain size at a restaurant always are charged a fixed gratuity.
Then there’re the square terminals that are normalizing up-front tipping for everything, not even just food service anymore. I’m sure I’m not the only person who has tipped up front for something and the service wound up being terrible. So there are three examples of tipping towards the future.
There’s another future component to tipping: in many places there is regulation that states if the tips don’t make up the prevailing normal minimum wage, the employer must pay the difference in salary. I’ve personally never seen this happen and I worked for tips for about 7 years.
We need new rules that improve enforcement. And then enforce the enforcement with rules about enforcing enforcement!1
That's the thinking of bureocrats who see the world in terms of rules and enforce, but fail to see the bigger picture that it's easier for everyone to just relax the rules.
Cover letters were required 100 years ago when CVs and resumes had to be delivered by postal mail and the secretary of the company had to direct the CV to the right application and job description, and phone calls or face interviews were not available or practical, because travelling took literally days.
Cover letters are literally a "cover" to a resume saying why are you sending that resume.
Today, that's just the subject of the email with the resume as attachment.
Today, cover letters provide no value to any involved party, and as you can see they can be easily played and manipulated. You're just adding more hoops to your own detriment.
> cover letters provide no value to any involved party
This might be true of a generic letter that's either written by AI or might as well be. But it's absolute nonsense in the general case.
Employers would much prefer to deal with the 5% of people who have actually read the ad than the 95% that hit autoapply on everything from the job board. Especially since a couple of sentences on the most relevant aspects of your career is much less effort for them than extracting the same information from 2 pages of resume covering mostly irrelevant stuff. They cover the sort of motivations and experiences you'd never put on a general CV which get candidates would otherwise be extremely borderline interviews. I've literally not binned of CVs of people later hired, based entirely on stuff included only in their cover letter.
Since interviews are a much bigger waste of time than reading and writing cover letters, arguably even the really bad cover letters help both parties. You can intentionally negative screen companies with tone and expectations too...
I disagree. For companies that I’m really passionate about working for I’ll craft a custom cover letter where I try to explain why I want to work for that company in particular and include some information about my experience. Sure most of the experience is in the CV but my passion for the company and the market they operate in doesn’t come across in my CV. I’m a PM not a dev of that makes a difference
> The developer could have accepted that allegedly inferior fix, give the credit, and patch it with their own version in a single commit.
My best oss contribution was done exactly like this. Someone else reviewed my code, made some changes, but my name was on the commits. I was happy that someone else took the time to make my code better and at the same time, keep my name on it.
As has been mentioned elsewhere if this had been submitted via the standard process, something more like that might have happened.
However, this was submitted to the security mailing list which is optimized for quick, precise fixes, not for teaching new contributors how to adhere to coding standards.
This methodology also has the side effect of "new contributor has security fix but can't contribute it because they need to be "taught" on non-security issues first."
The new contributor didn't have the knowledge and skills to make a patch that followed project standards. They were still able to submit a report and a first attempt at fixing the issue and get people who do know how to do that to craft a fix quickly. This is the system working correctly.
Rather than being thankful that other people contributed their time and effort to help OP solve the issue their company was facing, OP decided to misquote the person who helped them and start drama where none was needed.
> Rather than being thankful that other people contributed their time and effort to help OP solve the issue their company was facing, OP decided to misquote the person who helped them and start drama where none was needed.
Wow, way to turn this around. The user had fixed their issue. Don't make it like "other people" "helped them solve it".
The user and his company were quite capable of compiling their own kernel and using that. They solved their own problem, with no help from others.
They then chose to disseminate it for the greater good.
And yet people like you are demanding that they show gratitude to the community for somehow deigning to help them.
You seem to take this very personally for some reason. I have "demanded" nothing...
Anyone is welcome to fork the kernel and commit code of whatever quality they want.
However, if they want their code included in the official kernel, then they need to follow that projects coding standards. They are not entitled to get their poorly written code merged to satisfy their ego.
Sure, a "suggested-by" tag would have been appropriate, but I would posit that after this public tantrum, getting assistance becoming official kernel contributor will be a bit harder. Who wants to donate their time and energy to someone who may twist their words to start unnecessary public drama as soon as they feel a little slighted?
Many decades ago I worked in a Java team who they were using some money as a double and some as a BigDecimal. When I asked why, ... they said that at the start they didn't think they'd have any issue with doubles. Years later and still had lots of tech debt because manually rounding doubles to BigDecimal.
> The more clients, the more chances that any will leave. That's called variance, aka, risk.
The less clients you have, the worse impact it can have if you lose the contract with one of them or the client downsizes.
Say you run an agency that has only a few clients, and (almost) all of them are automotive... and then covid hits, leading to budget cuts in the entire sector as the carmakers can't sell cars because they don't have chips to make them with. Now, you're fucked unless you have iron-clad contracts with fixed minimal spending amounts or retainers which is a rarity in the business. This happened here in Germany and it was an awful time.
And now you run the same agency, but have a multitude of small, medium and large clients, among different industries... so what if your 1, 2 automotive clients cut their budget, you just call up the other clients and ask them "hey, we have a bit of capacity left, wanna do <X>?".
>> This year Germany’s GDP is forecast to shrink by about 0.4 per cent, the worst performance of any large country in the eurozone and any member of the G20, with the exception of Argentina.
