> At least with popular systems there’s a lot of state level hacking activity so zero days get patched routinely

Not sure how you're implying one leads to the other.

> Would Git have been significantly better if it had collected telemetry, or would the data not have just been a distraction?

I'm not sure if you're implying it's obvious but it's not obvious to me that it would be unhelpful.

Just anecdotally, I get the feeling telemetry often does more harm than good, because it's too easy to misinterpret or lie with statistics. There needs to be proper statistical methodology and biases need to be considered, but this doesn't always happen. Maybe a contrived example, but someone wants to show high impact on their next performance review? Implement the new feature in such a way that everyone easily misclicks it, then show the extremely high engagement as demonstration that their work is a huge success. For Git, I'm not sure it would be widely adopted today if the development process was mainly telemetry-driven rather than Torvalds developing it based solely on his expertise and intuition.

Not to mention it's really hard to statistically tell the difference between people spending a lot of time with a feature because it's really useful or because it's really difficult to get to do what you want

Telemetry is a really poor substitute for actually observing a couple of your users. But it's cheap and feels scientific and inclusive/fair (after all you are looking at everyone)

That is just poor analytics IMO, if you have a good harness you can definitely tell if a feature is not well designed. You have to optimize for things like number of clicks to perform an operation not time spent in app.

I think the seeing the underutilized commands and flags (with real data not just a hunch) would have helped identify where users were not understanding why they should use it, and could have helped refine the interface and docs to make it gradually more usable.

I mean no solution is perfect, and some underused things are just only sometimes extremely useful, but data used smartly is not a waste of time.

What do you mean by most academics? In Europe? That's just blatently untrue.

who said it has to be novel?

Yeah but you can just look that stuff up

Nukes in Iraq?

That was what the gov’t was saying was true - which was a lie, and was later proven to be a lie.

Which reinforces my point?

at a range where short-range anti-ship missiles can reach ships from Iranian territory.

So, the entire gulf?

Actual short-range weapons can't cross the strait. The ones that can don't care much about the difference on the rest of the place.

And boats, amd submerged drones, and mines...

Not even short range. With a sensor feed from an ally they can project into the Gulf of Oman, and via Yemen the entire BaM.

Doubtful China would provide that because they want oil, but likely Russia would, because they want high oil prices and American humiliation.

Did Israel peacefully withdraw from the Golan Heights? No? Unilateral annexation condemened by nearly everyone in the international community.

Is there peace with Syria? No? So no unilateral withdrawal.

It's literally called aesthetics, the philosophical approach is the original meaning of the word - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetics

Properly, focusing on aesthetics as an ethic would be practicing the philosophy of aestheticism - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aestheticism

> Shares in the California-based company rose by about 6% following news of the proposed settlement.

Personally, as someone coming from a region that has suffered many times over by the actions of this so called "Ministry of Defense," I feel like "Department of War" is a more accurate and honest term.

As I've noted multiple times here on HN, I don't disagree with this.

But the question is not about whether it is a more accurate and honest term. It is about people complying in advance with the illegal/extra-legal renaming of a federal agency by a president who does not have the right or authority to do so.

If we were talking about Congress voting to rename the DoD as the DoW, I'd have nothing to say on the matter that differed from your observation.

Yeah that's fair you guys should still call it DoD. I think I'm gonna stick to DoW from here on out though.