JackCh

It's helpful to use

    -i, --ignore-errors

When doing that. By default, if a playlist contains a single video that's no longer available, youtube-dl will stop downloading the playlist when it hits that video.

When playing a youtube playlist in mpv with youtube-dl, sometimes --load-unsafe-playlists is needed. This is rare however.

I bet most would start doing it with screen capture software/cards. I think many already are.

Do I have the right to go into peoples homes and root through their archived correspondence to find and burn lengthy personal Christmas letters I once sent them? If instead of writing a letter I made a video and sent them a link, and they decided to keep the video around, that would be no different.

They would have no moral right to republish that letter/video, but I would have no moral right to take their copy from them.

If by "elephant in the room" you mean "something nobody gives a single shit about." Seriously, why should I care?

Should File->Save Page As... be considered the "elephant in the room" when Firefox is discussed?

Youtube-dl works with nearly everything. It's incredibly versatile.

If you hold down shift, you can drag-and-drop youtube links into a running mpv instance to add those links to the current playlist.

Real audiobooks are fine when available but the selection is very limited. Many books worth reading have never been narrated.

There is also the trouble of "A/V sync", wherein you want to mix reading the book with listening to the book. You can do this with some proprietary solutions like Kindle if you purchase both the ebook and get the audio book, but this is again limiting.

Sufficiently advanced malice disguises itself as stupidity.

> "I read a lot, but have a lot less time for it since I started biking to work instead of taking the train."

If you're not adverse to wearing ear buds while biking (I know some people are, for situational awareness reasons) I recommend using FBReader with the TTS plugin for 'reading' ebooks when you can't have your eyes on the screen. I do this while running. The computer voice is offputing for an hour or two but if you push through that it becomes a great way to get through books using time that would have otherwise been book-free.

Adding qualifications? The context of this discussion was plainly train stations; in fact I explicitly mentioned train stations twice in my original comment. Display technology seems to be something you take very personally, but that's no reason to throw around insults.

We're talking about train station displays, not arbitrary displays. Nobody has ever done word processing on a split-flap display so obviously I'm talking about a restricted domain. They don't need to display arbitrary information and the range of information they need to display rarely changes since that typically involves construction. The noise, an unintentional consequence of the mechanism, provides utility to train travelers and is therefore a feature.

In a busy train station the duration of the split-flap change provides an auditory clue to what's going on. If you hear one or two rows update then nothing out of the ordinary is happening. If you hear several rows update that might be a good indication that your train is now on the board, or it could signal mass delays. For many years I went through 30th Street Station in Philadelphia with a split-flap board in the middle and I loved that board. When I'm at airports with LCD boards, I always miss it. LCD boards are trash, you don't notice them changing unless you're staring at them, almost always have text too small to read unless you're standing directly in front of it, and are completely soulless.

I learned to type on a Selectric years before my family bought our first computer. I haven't touched one since.

The best display technology IMHO is the old electro-mechanical split-flap. They update pretty fast, and they make one hell of a racket when they do so everybody in the train station knows when something updated (this is a feature). They're sufficiently versatile to display information a train station needs to. They also have a certain aesthetic that simply cannot be touched by modern LCD/LED displays.

Netflix is no longer competing with traditional television, they're competing with a user-driver modern web. Youtube doesn't allow all kinds of content but even so it has orders of magnitude more coverage than netflix. And for the content you won't find on youtube, it's usually pretty easy to find it on other sites. I think this is a problem for Netflix that is only going to get worse as the older generations that were primed by traditional television become less economically relevant and new generations of "internet natives" come in.

Personally if I'm going to sit down and passively consume media, I usually like it to be about people making things, ideally with constrained resources. Preferably nonfiction. At any point in time Netflix may have a handful of documentaries that fit the bill, but compared to a platform like youtube it's basically nothing.

I'm not furious about anything, did you notice that I'm not the guy upthread? Though I do find your assumption that I like Friends and Breaking Bad to be strange. Why do you assume that?

> "Netflix is providing content for a broader ideological range."

Furthermore, this is not actually the opposite of what I said. ("I think it should suffice to say that the range of netflix content is far narrower than the ideological range of the general population.") You use the word "broader", which is a relative term, but don't specify precisely what you are relating Netflix to. I assume you are relating it to traditional television programming (I assume this since the two shows you mentioned by name were traditional television programming.) But if you'll read my statement again, you'll see that's not what I was relating Netflix to.

I related the range of Neflix content to the ideological range of the general population. Not to traditional television, to the general population. Do I really need to explain that traditional television too only covers a small slice of the ideological range of the general population? I'll do so:

There are ideas and worldviews out there in which you'll never find mentioned or catered to in any mainstream television show or any Netflix show. The reasons for this are as varied as the ideas and worldviews themselves. Some don't get on TV or Netflix because they are difficult to monetize or run contrary to corporate interests. Some are too niche to bother recognizing, and others are offensive to other larger portions of society (I assume you assume it all falls under this later category, because you're eager to act morally righteous. I assume that about you because you assumed I was furious.) Some ideas and worldviews go unrecognized by television and netflix simply because they've gone unnoticed by television and netflix executives and filmmakers.

The sum of human ideology, ideas and worldviews is MUCH larger than the sum of what traditional television and netflix has on display. It's healthy to recognize this because failure to do so necessarily means your understanding of the world is contracted to the intersection of what mass media executives think publishable (that is, what they can agree amongst themselves to publish.)

> "When weed is entirely legal, I would not be surprised if there really was an Uber for weed"

There was during the gray-market period in Washington, following the legalization vote but before the regulation was finalized. Dealers with well publicized (prominently in local newspapers) websites and phone numbers, you'd give them a call and a few minutes later they'd pull up to wherever you were. All they were missing was the app.

> "I'd hazard that 80% of the population doesn't even know the difference between bacteria and fungus."

Seriously? They teach this in 5th or 6th grade science classes in American public schools. I'm pretty sure it's common knowledge that mushrooms are fungus but not bacteria.

Both are true, depending on the individual. One one end you'll find people who insist on thinking for themselves no matter their environment. On the other end of the scale you'll find people who never think, even when placed in an environment that encourages them to think. In the middle, were probably most people exist, you find the impressionable people. People who would think for themselves if the environment was conducive for it, but stop thinking for themselves when given the right encouragement. They drink coca cola because they see advertisements for it everywhere, but if those advertisements were banned they might choose to drink something else instead.

That's the way I see it anyway; one big gradient. I don't believe the world is so black or white that the entire population exists on one extreme or the other.

The harmful social pressure to drink alcohol is no excuse to introduce new social pressures to consume other drugs. On the contrary, it serves as a good example of why that shouldn't be done.

I made a straightforward statement concerning my perception of what is 'cool', of course that statement says something about my concept of 'cool'! What you really wanted to do here was to criticize my concept of cool, but instead finding the stones to do that you left a very passive borderline tautological statement.

You wanted to criticize me, but chose to respond with a passive non-statement instead. That says a lot about your approach to communication! [Is this doing it right? I'm trying to speak your dialect.]

> "The goal isn't to produce a speech-to-text system that can recognize a perfectly miked BBC announcer."

Wait what? The headline is about text-to-speech aka speech synthesis, not speech recognition (speech-to-text.) Are they trying to do both? It seems to me that you'd train both using different sorts of datasets. If you wanted TTS to be intelligible to the most number of people, training to to speak like a 'perfectly miked BBC announcer' is probably exactly what you'd want to do.

Train it to recognize many regional accents, but train it to speak with the most prevalent and universally understood accent you can find. So either BBC English or Californian/Hollywood English.

Although traditionally TTS engines have shipped with numerous voices, such that you can select either a British or an America accent for the English voice. It may be worthwhile to have other English accents too, maybe one for India (125 million speakers.) But if you trained a TTS engine to have a computer amalgamation of all possible English accents I really doubt the result will be considered high quality by anybody.

It's probably best for civility's sake if he didn't. Would it really add much to the discussion if he did? I think it should suffice to say that the range of netflix content is far narrower than the ideological range of the general population.

Weed was cool until The Man started wanting me to smoke it.

If the controls for everything that I need are physical, then I don't need the digital controls.

Are you aware that your website cannot be accessed from many Tor exit nodes without solving a google captcha?

We live in a world where the rights of criminals are given more respect than the privacy of their victims.

I prefer critical analysis to unthinking yes-men. To the extent that HN administration agrees with me, I appreciate them.

Find reasons in the present to appreciate life. Anticipation of new things shouldn't be your sole source of happiness. Criticism of flashy and ambitious but unworkable ideas shouldn't make you depressed because there should be plenty that already exists that keeps you happy. It's a big world out there.

Chinese cars, not built to the safety standards demanded by other nations or built to the bare minimum at best, tend to be man-killers not Tesla-killers.

Most gas stations will realize they have the real estate once they calculate how many additional hotdogs those bored EV drivers will buy while they're waiting for their charge.