Aceticon

Punk Floyd

The version, with the ox is from Portugal. Specifically the Portuguese saying literally translates as "put the cart in front of the oxen" (so we use plural oxen rather than horse).

Specifically in electronics there are actually milspec versions of some microchips, different from the consumer grade ones (they have a wider range of operating temperatures plus I also believe higher resistence to electromagnetic radiation and mechanical vibration, similar to microchips "for ~~automobile~~ automotive use"), but I suspect that when it comes to actual consumer electronics devices the words "military grade" are not a protected tag (as in, electronic devices said to be "military grade" are not forced by regulation to have certain characteristics) so those words are generally marketing bullshit.

Also now you have to buy a special cloth from Apple to clean the gold logo on the Offical Apple MacBook Cleaning Cloth Pro without scratching it.

(It's cleaning cloths all the way down!)

Propely done Agile is more to solve the "We have the general idea of what we need but will only know for sure the details of how it will work once the users see it and start playing around with it".

You still need to upfront know that a wedding is actually needed, but have a process for figuring out and trying out the details of the various elements of it (say, as part of deciding what kind of food will there be for the reception, actually preparing and trying various options) before the whole things actually gets "delivered".

Agile also works well for environments were software is developed to serve the kind of business which is are constantly changing (for example, certain areas of Finance) or is something totally new being created from the ground up (i.e. many if not most Startups) because the business itself is a sort of a neverending "we'll figure out what we need and if it works well when we get there and try it out" which matches almost perfectly the fast and scope-limited definition->implementation->feedback cycles of the Agile software development process.

I once had a customly designed project for an external client of a web-development company were I was technical lead and the sales guy who sold it to the customer without ever consulting us about it had the project management responsability.

On the very first day the guy got me, the junior developer and the designer together for the project launch meeting and started saying how we would have to work extra to make it fit his (ridiculously short) deadlines and I just said "No, it's not at all possible to fullfill those deadlines so that's not going to happen" and when he tried to argue with "what about the client" I replied that "You came up with those estimates and gave them to the client without even talking to us, the experts in that domain, so managing the fallout with the client from that is your problem not ours".

I fondly remember all that because of the transition from downtrodden and unhappy to absolute happiness visible on the face of the junior developer when, after the sales guy / project manager gave us the "work extra hard" spiel I (as the tech lead) replied with "No, that's not going to happen".

(Ultimatelly the project took twice as long as the sales guy's estimates)

The whole "putting the cart in front of the oxen" (as we say in my country) of this meme reminded me of that one (and that memory invariably puts a smile on my face).

I think at least some countries in Europe had a similar system as the US but moved to Restricted Birthright in the 80s because of freeloading - i.e. well off people with no connection to a country just flying over and having their kids there to give them citizenship in that country.

With Restricted Birthright the parents have to have been living in that country for a few years - so de facto being members of that society - to earn that right.

Personally I think it's fair that those comitted to participating in a Society all deserve the same rights (including local nationality for their children) independently of themselves having or not the local nationality, whilst those who are not comitted to participating in that Society do not, and "being resident in that country for more than X years" seems to me a pretty neutral and reasonably fair way to determine "comitted to participating in that country's Society".

That's what everybody will be saying in the Northern Hemisphere every time there is a break in the nuclear winter cloud cover, only with more feeling of joy (so, more exclamation marks!!!).

I think that the Restricted Birthright citizenship which is most common in Europe tries to navigate somewhere between those two extremes - in it basically if you're a Resident in that country for more than X years (from what I've seen usually X years is 2 years) then your children born there get citizenship.

It filters out freeloading - well-off people who have no personal investment in a country and its future and never contributed to it in any way, just flying over and having their kids there to give them citizenship - whilst still extending the same rights as locals have to those who, whilst not having the local nationality, are participating members of that society.

I think the fairest way is to give equal treatment (including giving the local nationality to their children and making it available to they themselves after a few years living there) to those who are participating members of a society but not to those who are not members of that society, and that would also mean that the fairest treatment would be that the children of local nationals who have long ago left (and the children themselves never in fact lived there) do not get that nationality automatically for merely their parents having it.

Ultimately I think nationality should be earned by living as part of a Society and when they're born children, having not have had a chance to "earn" it, would inherited that from the or parents.

That said some level of obtaining nationality based on the nationality of one's parents makes sense to cover the time gaps of people who moved abroad and had children there before they could qualify for the nationality of the country they were born with, since otherwise those children would be stateless.

As for the decision mechanism being "years legally living in a country" it's just the simplest and most equal for all (passing no judgment for things like what people do for a living) way of judging "participating in that Society" whilst only excluding people who were neither invited in nor taken in because they've truly need help (i.e. it's only for legal immigrants and refugees).

More like "He who pops from the right (read: sufficiently wealthy) vagina wins!"

In the other countries whose language I speak well enough to be able to spot it (granted, only 4), the upper class simply don't have their own accent (though they do signal their status, just in other ways), but I can't really know for sure if there are other countries out there in the World with an "upper class accent".

You're joking but when living in Britain I did know a couple of people who weren't middle-class English and whose natural accent wasn't the so-called English RP accent (basically middle-class English / BBC presenter accent) and who made quite the effort to speak with the latter accent.

In Britain (most notably England) one's accent is a huge part of presenting the "right" image, to the point that the upper class has their own accent (known as the "posh accent") independent of region, something which is at very least highly unusual in other countries.