Clamchop

Yeah, I dunno. Besides being a lot for 1995, the address space stuff, if taken at face value, means you'd only have to knick 3 bits off before starting to eat into it. Shrug

The article is a touch confusing, but I'm pretty sure I agree that they meant the 640 kilobyte limit of the OG PC architecture. The Pentium II dates from 1997, the NV1 to 1995, and the new PCI bus with its whopping 32-bits to 1992. 640MiB would have been a prodigious amount of memory at the time of launch.

I don't think any mathematical relationship between the address bus and either 640KiB or 640MiB was intended, it was just the anchor point for how huge 4GiB of addressing was viewed at the time.

The article then goes on to say that the NV1 used 23 bits of the address bus but adds in the next paragraph that 16 bits remained to use for data. That math isn't working out for me.

Actually, I'm really struggling to understand how this scheme would work at all. It strongly implies open addressing with no other MMIO devices to conflict with, but that's just not how I thought PCI worked. Maybe someone who knows more can explain it to me.

Photography mostly eliminated the once-indispensable portrait artist, among other formerly-dependable lines of work.

There's a line to be drawn somewhere between artist and craftsperson. Creating beautiful things to a brief has always been a teachable skill, and now we're teaching it to machines. And, we've long sought to mass-produce beautiful things anyway. Think textiles, pottery, printmaking, architectural adornments.

Can AI replace an artist? Or is it just a new tool that can be used, as photography was, for either efficiency _or_ novel artistic expression?

There's a pretty standard argument that creating artworks should or must require the hardship of developing the skill to bring vision into reality, or paying someone who can. That can be debated, but the position is textbook gatekeeping.

Other disapproval comes from different emotional places: a retreading of ludditism borne out of job insecurity, criticism of a dystopia where we've automated away the creative experience of being human but kept the grim work, or perceptions of theft or plagiarism.

Whether AI has worked well for you isn't just irrelevant, but contrarian in the face of clear and present value to a lot of people. You can be disgusted with it but you can't claim it isn't there.

32 bit sure but I think you overlooked the x86 part! Only one of those is that, and a sliver of credit for embedded, but that's gotta be rare.

I don't think that counts as communicating to people at all, let alone to as many people.

They take up a lot of space and they can be inconvenient and potentially unsafe to pedestrians. Unsafe for the same reason that right turns on red are unsafe: drivers are looking to their left for traffic and not to their right.

They were rare in the US before, I want to say, 15 or 20 years ago but I see them all the time now and new ones are always being installed. Good traffic devices, with the above tradeoffs in mind.

I think you're probably right that most drivers are speeding but I will note that a sampling of drivers that pass you necessarily will not include any that are going your speed or slower. It doesn't take many drivers on the road to feel like you are constantly getting overtaken.

Oranges and other citrus are examples of non-climacteric fruits, meaning they do not continue to ripen after being picked. So, they have to be picked at the desired level of ripeness.

Us Americans have been taught exceptionalism all our lives. The people consider themselves to have built and to live in the freest and generally most superlative country that ever was.

We were pretty "soft" (dislike the term) on the land borders and on immigration. Fairly easy to enter, to claim asylum, to live and work on different sides, and so on.

I don't have an answer for the question of if we should be making our border security as intense as it can be elsewhere, but I don't love the story of just doing as other countries do. We're exceptional, right?

I don't think this is a great comment I'm writing, but it's how I feel about things right now.

The characteristic flavor of cinnamon is almost entirely due cinnamic aldehyde.

There's a lot of it in various species of Cinnamomum. My guess is that they are using a mix of true cinnamon and its close relatives.

It occurs rarely and in small amounts in other plants, so small that I don't think it would be economical.

The only other shortcut to "natural" flavor that I can think of would be GMO bacteria or something.

It's very likely that the natural flavors include other things unrelated to cinnamon, like vanillin or eugenol (cloves, carnation). Flavoring is an art closely related to perfumery, by the way.

The work is mysterious and important.

Constructor injection is still autowiring. Spring used to demand that you annotate constructor arguments with @Autowired but that changed some time ago.

> First Amendment protections are only available for U.S. citizens

This is something that feels like it should be true but it isn't. The Constitution applies to everyone with some very specific exceptions to the jurisdiction of the United States.

What is true is that there's a long standing sort of gentleman's agreement between the courts and the executive that basically grants the administration a large amount of discretion in handling immigration despite the Constitution.

As far as I'm aware, ClearType is still enabled by default in Windows.

Subpixel text rendering was removed from MacOS some time ago, though, presumably because they decided it was not needed on retina screens. Maybe you're thinking of that?

> avoid ugly things like Spring's autowiring of dependencies.

This seems awfully close to "avoid Spring" to me, heh.

Though, I've grown rather fond of Spring Boot over time, but I've gathered that's not exactly the popular consensus.

Half-Life 1 was groundbreaking but still very much of its era. Half-Life 2 feels like a modern game, though.

I already admitted that this brings me joy. I love things like this.

It's just not a very persuasive argument, even when I make it to myself, because I believe so strongly that other things are more important.

I'm not really sure what the takeaway is here. It's not "don't write comments" since that would not have helped the situation.

At the very least, if you're going to write comments, bug reports, and code reviews, each one should be descriptive enough _on its own_. Not the right time for DRY! It is indeed irritating having to follow a thread across several places to get to the answer.

Wait, people are buying stuff of unknown quality off the internet, mixing it with water in their kitchens, _and injecting it?_

That's wild. Even the article author seems to have a tongue in their cheek when issuing this "warning" that is definitely not a hint. Is it safer than it sounds?

There's not really an answer in the article besides not wanting to clearly identify a point in time, and wanting the cars to match in some sense the personalities of the characters that drive them.

The show's aesthetic takes a high dose of "cassette tape futurism", juxtaposing advanced tech with the primitive. Also featured are anachronistic computer terminals, VHS tapes, and music records. The car choices play well with that.

N.B.: Particularly primitive is Lumon's surveillance of severed employees. This hardly makes sense when the chips can be activated remotely, but heavy surveillance would kill the exploratory velocity of the story so that was a good choice, in my opinion.

Pardon me if "it looked cool" isn't persuasive.

I don't believe for a second that you wrote your comment as an earnest solicitation for information.

I've grown rather fond of San Diego.

There's some irony in this comment. It's also a textbook ad hominem.

I love the ad and the stunt. I would have been as giddy as a child if I'd seen it in person.

It's also rings true to me that it's rather wasteful and destructive in service of selling TVs.

Shrug, what's done is done so I'm free to enjoy it guilt-free while also thinking we probably shouldn't do stunts like this anymore.

Besides food preferences, you're being very cavalier here about that extra $5.

I see this sort of remark every time McDonald's comes up and I always wonder why it doesn't prompt people to check their assumptions. Clearly they are doing well enough so you're missing something.

I think the odds of that happening are remote, but there is prior art from other streaming services for only serving reduced quality to clients that don't support DRM, or to clients that they just don't seem to like.

The technical term for the "stickiness" you're referring to, where a system is resistant to change or has a memory, is hysteresis.

They may not want to imply that didder's linearized rabbit is wrong, but I'm comfortable saying so. It's not just a little dark, it's way dark, to the point of hiding detail.

The linearized RGB palette is similarly awful. It clobbers a whole swath of colors, rendering them as nearly black. Purples are particularly brutalized. Yellows disappeared and became white.

On my phone, the middle palette doesn't appear too bright to my eyes, either.

Even the linearized gradient looks worse, .

Maybe linear is not best for perceptual accuracy.