Elte

Well, this does explain the disproportionate amount of actors that are arrested in CSI after reviewing the video evidence.

Looks great! Is it too late to suggest a rename to co-fit? (Sorry, I couldn't help myself)

Maybe I'm missing something, but is the exploit somehow generating a cache miss? Otherwise everything that's already in cache isn't vulnerable to this right? Not that it makes it in any way less scary, but slightly more complicated at least..

Yeah times 1.6 isn't too hard right? Just add 50% and 10% in succession, very easy to do in your head.

The other way around is trickier. I tend to divide by 8 (or /2/2/2) and multiply by 5, which is harder but still consists only of steps that are clearly defined in my head.

Every time an article about comments comes around I wonder: am I the only one who likes lots of comments, even those that don't add _any_ added reasoning, if they provide a clear visual distinction between things? The "Damn right it's ugly!" example from this article is infinitely more readable to me than his suggested replacement.

Damn, it seems I really dodged a bullet here. I was recently asked for security questions logging into a company account (iOS management account). Whoever created the account only jotted down the answers to two of the questions. It asked for precisely these two, and I was able to change the other without answering the third..

Haha I understand where you're coming from with that, but I don't have that problem anymore. Everyone makes dumb mistakes and asks stupid questions; it's completely irrelevant, the only thing that matters is the outcome. I think if a person ever where to read any of my writing walls they may be relieved that they're not the only ones going through a process like that ;).

I like to keep "writing walls" of whatever problem I need to solve, either in work or outside of it. These are basically Google Docs without rules about structuring of content, it's mostly me type-talking with myself about what the problem is, what some possible approaches are for solving it, or even "arghs" and the occasional profanity if things don't work out. Also I paste in URLs for whatever useful resources I find which has saved me a lot of time when working on semi-related things in the past. There are no rules, I just write what comes to mind or whatever I don't wish to store inside my head anymore.

It's a simple thing but it has proven rather helpful in my process to have some place to rant and ponder things without needing to think about the correctness of that particular process as well.

It is my understanding that PhysX is more comparable to a physics engine, like Bullet Physics or Open Dynamics Engine, both of which Gazebo integrates. Perhaps they could now integrate PhysX as well...

EDIT: When I say "integrates", I actually mean "interfaces with"; you can run Gazebo simulations using either physics engine (although switching between the two is not quite as simple as that).

Wow, it took me a bit of trying, but I was surprised at how clearly I could see the "compound" picture with the right amount of "cross" when the rest of the world was blurred. And at how well the differences stood out.

I've learned a new party trick :D.

This. I don't have experience with Forms, but Rider is a massive improvement over VS on both platforms for "native" Xamarin development. I actually quite liked VS for Windows when I started working with it a couple of years ago, but as of late it seems to have gotten only slower and buggier. Since we do only Android / iOS at my job I don't even bother with Windows anymore. I still "need" VS for Mac to (a) build iOS layouts in interface designer (which is hell, I regularly consider going code only for those) and (b) to deploy Android apps when debugging. Rider will do that, but it doesn't do the fast assembly deployment that VS does so it's very slow even if there are no changes. And thus I write code in Rider, and run through VS. VS for Mac doesn't include as much bloat as VS for Windows, which makes it "better" because it's relatively light and doesn't lock up too long when switching to it. As an editor it's just annoying though. Debugging in it is a necessary pain right now.

If this sounds cumbersome... it is. I find it workable right now but I'm regularly annoyed. Build + deploys fail when I fire them off too soon after changing an .axml file. Builds fail as a rule, not an exception, when there are Xamarin or Android SDK updates. iOS is actually mostly fine, except for the hell that is the designer. All in all none of these things are show stoppers, but I don't think I could wholeheartedly recommend Xamarin for new apps.

> The Dutch use bikes as a tool to feed their transit system: 50 percent of all trips that take place on the transit system in the Netherlands begin with a bicycle ride.

This is why I'm still waiting for Google Maps and the likes to include an "I have a bike and am willing to use it to get to the closest train/metro/bus station" option.

Compared to Visual Studio + ReSharper, Visual Studio for Mac is quite a step back (putting it mildly). I've high hopes for Rider (cross-platform JetBrains IDE for .NET that was just released), though I haven't tried it yet.

Haha I'd like to add one disclaimer: don't try during race season ;).

Yes and no. Fat burning is an important part of distance running, but you can get many of the adaptations without running in a fasted state too often, whereas running fasted (/low glycogen) can severely hamper recovery and performance. I feel like the intense focus on fat burning is a bit of a fad (pun fully intended). You should also realise that boosting fat burning capabilities comes at the expense of glucose burning, which ultimately means you lose the ability to go into higher intensity zones. At the very least carb up before your speed workouts...

If you want to set yourself up for a successful marathon, I'd say being skilled in fueling yourself during the run is probably more important than optimizing fat burning.

Last summer I tried intermittent fasting as an experiment attempting to lose some body weight to become a more efficient runner. I figured it would work for me because generally I would not get hungry in the morning until I actually ate something. I regularly work out twice a day, so to accomodate I took some protein / BCAA's around the workout that fell outside the eating window. Within the window my diet was high in healthy fats, plants and protein - basically all the stuff recommended for this kind of diet.

It worked great for about a month or so, and I lost a couple of kg. Then the cravings started, mostly for sugar. Could no longer focus at work, was irritable, exercise performance declined. I ended up gaining all the weight back + about 1kg or so before I decided to cut it off. Right now I'm on a predominantly plant-based diet for about half a year now, feeling great, faster and lighter than ever.

My point: if you're a (semi-)serious athlete with the same goals I had, by all means try it out, but don't expect a silver bullet. The overwhelming majority of athletes follow a normal diet schedule and eat significant amounts of carbohydrates. I encourage everyone to experiment with their body to see what works for them - it's the one thing that's all yours, after all. Just don't assume you're the exception.

Even so it's important to have been researched. Where exercise (or nutrition, for that matter) is concerned many statements floating around the internet in particular sound entirely logical - including a lot of false ones.

Not sure if this is intentional, but it took me 3 reads of that header to realize it did not say "descent night's sleep".

That e-mail went out before I posted here, and I fully intend on providing the answer myself ;). Should've probably made that more obvious. EDIT: Updated with the answer!

My mom used to tell me about a similar procedure she would perform to help people with cateracts in Africa 30 years ago, so I'm a bit confused. I'm not saying this isn't awesome or special, just a bit curious what has changed to make it particularly special now.

EDIT: So I asked her, it seems the main difference is the new lens they're putting in. With a cateract the lens is clouded and the essence of this procedure is cutting out that lens so that light reaches the retina once more. 30 years back they did not have new lenses to put in though, so (quote) "we would send everyone home with +10 glasses". She also recalls the expeditions into Nepal going into the mountains to operate cateracts 14 consecutive days full time even back then (takes a while to get up to 100.000 I suppose :]).

So it used to be they were getting people who saw nothing to see something. Now they get people who see nothing to see really well, which is of course huge.

Ah, yes, this. When I went back to university after taking a break a couple of years ago I promised myself it would be out of pure interest, because I cared about the subject, not to get good grades. Of course it didn't work out exactly that way, pretty soon there's an assignment to hand in tomorrow, and exam to get points on next week... and again I found myself preparing to answer the questions I knew I was going to get, rather than delving into that one subject that seemed interesting, or reading through the proof of a theorem being used. The grades were good, the learning... maybe not so much.

Right now I'm working on my final thesis research, and I found a good subject. Everyone keeps asking what my deadline is, when it is going to be done, how I'm progressing. I don't care. I'm learning, creating and having fun. I want to be able to spend the whole day exploring a topic I don't understand, or refactoring parts of my simulation code that I don't like. I know I'll get it done at some point, and when I do it'll be a valuable contribution at least to myself and hopefully the field I'll be publishing in. That's what learning's supposed to be like for me.

I stopped drinking alcohol a while ago for several reasons, an increased exercise regimen being one of them (though not the most important one). Now when people "ask" I just say I'm an athlete (which has become more true since then), gets them off my back pretty quick.

Apparently being healthy is frowned upon for anyone who doesn't need it (semi-)professionally.

For who's interested, NASA has an open source toolkit for simulating these structures, using Bullet physics:

https://github.com/NASA-Tensegrity-Robotics-Toolkit/NTRTsim

It's fun to play with.

Beat me to it with this comment, a very solid point.

Having nothing to hide now doesn't mean you'll never have something to hide in retrospect.