I always find it fascinating as there's also an aspect of documentation with certain street photography. If you look at stuff from the 1980's and see how much things have changed, the fashion the shops and so on, but also how certain things are still the same.
Certain cameras are marketed with the whole concept of being good for street photography and like to play with the historic aspect. Like most marketing it's aspirational. Will you be able to capture the decisive moment like Henri Cartier-Bresson?
There are various famous street photographers and their books are always popular with enthusiasts.
As a hobbyist photographer I once went on a street photography course in London.
They did cover the ethics and morals of street photography, along with various techniques about what to do if challenged.
UK law is a bit different than US law. From my understanding the US law allows any photography in a public space. While UK law does not allow street photography on private property (although if you're on public property photographing into private property that's OK), plus any photos of places where they'd expect a degree of privacy. So you can't stick your camera over walls etc.
I also checked the laws around photography in the UK and there are general rules around nuisance photography (that wouldn't cover conventional street photography). Additionally I looked at rules around photographing children in the UK, and generally it's not permitted to take photos of other people's children without their parent's / guardians permission.
The photo on the subway in the article wouldn't _technically_ be allowed in the UK, as the tube in London is private property (although everyone takes photos there) and photographing other people's children without permission isn't really allowed.
At the other end of the spectrum, I've also been to events on private property in the UK like Comic Cons. They have a very comprehensive photo policy for both the photographers and the attendees. While photographing at these events I often switch to a kind of "pantomime" mode, where it's very clear that I'm taking a photo and the subject has clearly agreed to be photographed. Other times I point my camera lens downwards when checking the shots and show them to the subject or have the lens cap on. At these events I've spoken to cosplayers who have thanked me for working like this, as they have had trouble with photographers behaving inappropriately.
I've only been challenged twice while doing street photography. Once while on the street photography course where I was taking a photo of a sandwich shop and a guy walked out while I was taking the photo. He politely challenged me and explained he was uncomfortable with me taking his photo. I showed him the photo and explained he wasn't in the shot. The second time I was challenged more aggressively, I was taking a photo of a long street with trams on near a tram station. Someone came up to me almost shouting asking if I took their photo. I explained I was taking a photo of the tram lines, and showed them a few shots. They seemed happier after that and left me to it. In truth when I got home and looked at my photos they were in the shot, but they were just one of many faces in the crowd. This shot was all about the lines of the tram station and how busy it was.
I remember once as a junior developer meeting up with the head of technology to rely a project update to him. During the meeting his (desk) phone started to ring. He looked down at it and pressed the mute button for the ringer. While commenting that they don't get to jump the queue just because they're phoning him.
At the time I found it reassuring that I had his undivided attention.
For me I feel disappointed that hydrogen fuel cells never took off. Toyota spent a fortune researching them, making them safe to avoid Hindenburg disaster type imagery. But it never really seems to have caught on. You can add a hydrogen pumping station to an existing petrol station too. Plus you don't need to add a charging station to your house. So there are lots of pluses.
Currently hydrogen fuel cells have a slight range advantage and speed of refueling advantage. However the efficiency of creating and compressing / liquifying hydrogen and then turning back into electricity in the cell is around half that of just charging a battery.
Fuels cells currently also don't put out as much burst power nor can they store energy from regenerative braking so a fuel cell car needs a traction buffer battery like a hybrid.
Pretty skeptical for hydrogen fuel cells at this point, battery cost are dropping fast while energy density going up along with charge rate, fuel cells are being left behind pretty quick.
I don't need to "add a charging station to my house". I already have multiple outlets outside of my house. If I want to be fancy, I can spend 500-1500€ and add a real Type2 charger with load balancing and remote control features.
Just FYI about hydrogen cars:
- They are just EVs with smaller batteries, a large part of the battery is replaced with a hydrogen tank + fuel cell.
- The WHOLE hydrogen storage system will need to be replaced fully every 10 or so years. Hydrogen is really really small and has a habit of escaping every vessel you try to keep it in.
- Currently the government subsidised price for H2 in Germany is 9.5€/kg. It takes about 1kg of hydrogen to drive 100km. Would you pay almost 10€/100km to drive a car? While an EV can do the same trip for 1-3€?
Do you know the amount of bureaucracy needed to store multiple hundreds of kg of pressurised highly flammable gas (hydrogen) anywhere?
Compare that to the amount of work needed to install what is essentially a fancy power outlet.
I initially thought they would take off, when I didn't know about the tech. Then I found out they charge batteries so they kind of have the worst of both worlds.
Whoever designs a cheap, safe, durable, light, easily mass produced hydrogen storage material will be a multi billionaire.
I've been using Thunderbird for years probably since it was created. I was going to write a message about wishing they would invest more in Thunderbird and fix a particular bug.
As I was typing this it made me starting looking a bug I've found using it. So then I started Googling around to see if someone else found it. Looking at it, it appears it's been open for 3 years. But in the bug ticket they had steps to fix it. I now know few more menus in Thunderbird that I never considered clicking on. The bug now seem to be resolved and happier.
But then I also wish they would trim it down or at least give me the option to turn stuff off. I don't want an events and task organiser and all this stuff. I just want a mail client. I also wish their spam filter would be more consistent and stuff keeps getting through that I've flagged and is clearly spam as it's the same message I've been receiving for the last couple of months.
What we do is have the idea of a present box. When we're out shopping (well in the days when you could go out shopping). If we saw something that would look like a good gift for person X or person Y we'd buy it and put it in the present box. It might be a book or a certain item of some kind.
Then when it comes to near a birthday or Christmas we'd check what's in the present box to see if we have anything suitable for them. If not we'd then go through the process of buying something. But the present box has saved us countless times as we'd often buy something thoughtful and put it in there in advance.
Over the years I've worked with many developers who don't write ANY unit tests, relying only on integration tests and this has caused severe bugs that could have easily been caught by unit tests. This has cost the companies they're working for a fair bit of money.
I've called this developers out and they often seem to be anti-unit test or against unit tests as they think it slows them down, when in reality the cost of cleaning up afterwards costs more.
When you start writing code with unit tests in mind, you generally follow best practices, and start to realise if a "unit" is too big and needs to be split up into smaller units. That and mocking I've found that the anti-unit test developers I've worked with commonly aren't keen on mocking stuff out either (but again, that's all anecdotally).
Generally I find Fowler's guidance on the test pyramid is always worth considering.
As one of those developers, the problem I face is learning how and why to write tests. Most of the tutorials I've read on the matter test things that are too trivial and test too often. It also doesn't help that the people I've worked with don't have a clue how to do it either or those that do it think that everybody should just get it and can't be bothered to explain it.
I recommend reading The Art of Unit Testing -> https://www.manning.com/books/the-art-of-unit-testing . At least this is the book I learned TDD from more than 10 years ago and the knowledge I gained from the book has proven to be timeless.
I see this problem a lot. TDD is a hard skill to learn. It took me 2 years of continuous practice to really get it, and by year 3 I was only just starting to get decent at it. People who try and do TDD for less than 6 months haven't even left the parking lot yet.
I try and short-cut that steep learning curve by mentoring other developers, but there isn't enough people who have that experience around. I've met lots of programmers, and less than 10% of them have ever even tried TDD, let alone done it enough to gain insight and mentor others.
I completely agree, I feel like I'm in the same boat. I do feel like I'm slowly making progress though - primarily by making small contributions to open source libraries that have tests, which requires updating and/or writing new tests - and then trying to replicate tests like that in my own small libraries.
It could also be due to the way the company incentivizes developers. Say a new system or tool needs to be shipped this quarter. They could incentivize that being delivered by offering bonuses to the team if they ship it on time. But if the bug is a minor issue, or will only happen 6 months after ship date (performance issue, leap year issue, etc), developers may elect to ship it as "broken" to meet their deadline. Then another "maintenance team" will be responsible for fixing the bug 6-12 months later when it surfaces in production.
Plus, if no one ever gets fired for shipping buggy code, why bother working so hard on bug-free code? It's a tradeoff.
I've found what really has helped me with TDD is a continuous test runner. Different platforms have different takes on them, but in my case it's NCrunch.
The fact that it's running the test as I'm typing is incredibility powerful. It helps me keep to a rhythm, as I don't have to stop and get the test runner to run the unit tests.
When I'm refactoring and a test goes red when I'm not expecting it has saved me time, it also helps you question everything, why was this test needed, do we still need it?
That and (with NCrunch at least) the coverage dots. If I'm diving into some code without an test coverage or code with gappy coverage it lets me know I need to be cautious.
Certain cameras are marketed with the whole concept of being good for street photography and like to play with the historic aspect. Like most marketing it's aspirational. Will you be able to capture the decisive moment like Henri Cartier-Bresson?
There are various famous street photographers and their books are always popular with enthusiasts.