Kliment

> Worse, focusing on the computer consumption may push web developers to just move computations to the server side, where the energy consumption is not measured. This will lead to an apparent drop on the client-side consumption, but does the overall system footprint decreases?

This may be a net win even if net power usage is the same because client devices are more likely to be battery constrained

I'm really frustrated that:

a) Stuff like this gets released in the wild without being part of the spec making it effectively impossible for any non-element client to support at release time

b) Any room that gets added to a server that supports spaces is no longer accessible to anyone whose homeserver isn't running the non-spec-compliant protocol from an unreleased version of synapse, because the default room version is 9 and synapse's latest release doesn't know wtf that means

It's really annoying that something that is supposed to be the pinnacle of interoperability and federation breaks compatibility like this.

Much better explanation of how it works here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNpAIZl4krc

I am not a lawyer, but here's my summary:

1. There's going to be a California-state-government-run list of gun owners. People who buy a gun or have it transferred to them get added to it. Not reporting a transfer is a crime.

2. When someone gets a restraining order against someone else, they can request information on whether said person is on the list and which/how many weapons they have. They are then allowed to use that information as they like. Law enforcement will be able to check whether someone is on the list.

3. There will be a second list of people ineligible to own a gun for various reasons. These are primarily the people who the state expects to fail a background check (which is required for purchase as I understand it). Anyone selling or transferring a gun will have to ask the registry whether the person they are transferring to is on the blocklist. Not doing so is a crime.

4. There will be a third list, which is the correlation of people who are on the first list and on the second list. This is a list of people who have firearms but would not be allowed to acquire firearms now. This list can be shared with universities and "bona fide research institutions".

As someone who lives in a place where gun ownership is not normal or tolerated for the most part, this is all really weird to me, so I'm not able to evaluate the significance of it, but this is what it says.

While the grandparent post is clearly misguided or willfully misleading, there is a thing in Germany about artificially expensive electricity for domestic users, which subsidizes price cuts for industrial users, and subsidies to the otherwise unprofitable coal industry.

I call it "daylight shaving time" because it's like shaving bits off a bar of soap to then glob them onto the other side of the same bar.

Delphi does not have an LGPL option. Lazarus, however, does.

No. Only if the Qt Company violates the terms of the agreement.

Qt's corporate owners have been openly hostile to the community for a while, and have been trying to get away with shady stuff. The license terms for commercial use are terrible, you need an active license to distribute existing software, not only develop new software, the prices are excessive and keep increasing, and once you get a commercial use license you have to keep it forever or you won't be able to distribute your existing work. Commercial license users are prohibited from contributing to the community version. They also made registration mandatory for all downloads, even of the GPL/LGPL licensed stuff, which information they use for Oracle-style license shakedowns. They keep delaying GPL/LGPL releases and have stated an intention to delay them by the maximum permitted amount (one year) meaning all community contributions are effectively blocked because contributors don't have access to the current codebase. While the contract with the Qt community does prevent the Qt Company from going completely closed, they're certainly not someone I'm comfortable with.

Delphi, as technology, is amazing. But the company controlling it operates on the model of locking-in existing customers and ratcheting up prices. It's a bad deal for everyone not already stuck in the ecosystem with things they need to maintain. Look up Lazarus for the open source I-can't-believe-it's-not-Delphi

Not sure if it's the same thing, but heavy cardstock is great at collecting dust off a flat surface - for some reason it sticks to the edge.

Clinical trials are expensive so unless you're massively well funded (like Moderna and BioNTech are at the moment, and basically nobody else in that space) you have to prioritize for whichever is the most promising based on prelim data. This is a problem trivially solved with money, but for some reason all the promising biotech developers are massively underfunded compared to branches such as killing people or selling advertising.

There's several more in their pipeline: https://www.excision.bio/technology

Because they're not on the rental market, but are mostly used as a value store by owners that don't live anywhere nearby, and have multiple properties.

Of course I would ban all advertising if it were up to me. There's no question about it.

Facebook uses your code. Facebook wants to sue you for patent infringement. Doing that makes them no longer have the right to use your code, so they're deterred from suing you.

No, the work of all teams except the pre-selected real one was discarded and never passed on for evaluation. If you wanted to do it for real you would do it up front and ask them all to try different approaches and have rendevous points to compare and evaluate and exchange findings. I suspect that would be much better morale for all teams involved, but would require management to give up on their "chosen" team, and put some real effort into this, which they were not willing to do (and before you ask, yes, the "backup" team suggested this and got rejected, and then got the fuck out)

I cannot reveal the source or the company but a major household-name automotive company would have several teams working on projects, with one pre-selected as the "real" one and the others not told their work would be discarded. The idea being that this way you can multiply the size of each engineering team and starve the competition of competent engineers. The fact this system exists was not disclosed to the engineers in order to prevent them from quitting. I know this from an engineer who quit after accidentally meeting a member of another team within the company working on the exact same project.

Turns out bad design isn't new. I agree with almost everything you've said - there's bad design examples from every period. There's plenty of UI design resources from the early 2000s and they all contain examples of bad UI. But that doesn't mean there's no difference between now and then. Having options split among labeled menus improves recall, even when it doesn't improve discovery (and it often does improve discovery because the labels aren't entirely arbitrary). So I definitely see this getting worse with hamburger-and-gear interfaces. Skeuomorphic colorful icons are usually easier to tell apart than font-based monochrome abstract line art, and they're much easier to remember, for non-colorblind users. Doesn't mean they can't be bad or misleading.

As for the size of clickable items, I consistently see interface elements that span the full width of the screen (except some padding) on modern giant-screen smartphones and tablets. It seems the screens grow and the UI elements grow with them, rather than remaining fingertip-sized. And of course none of this has any place on desktop, but it gets reused there anyway.

I'm not the person you're replying to but I can put in my two cents on what I miss often in modern designs:

- Information density. This is especially a problem with communication tools, which for some reason are all copying Slack and leaving very little screen space for the thing you actually want to see - the text that the other person is writing. Messages go off the screen very quickly and a lot of screen space is spent on decorations (user icons, names, speech bubbles, padding) leaving it with basically the density of comic chat. Graphic background images with semitransparent visual elements on top are another similar trend which uses a lot of padding to not obscure the background too much, and the transparency makes contrast and readability worse.

- Affordance discoverability. Many modern user interfaces have a lot of functionality hidden behind catchall elements like a user icon, a gear icon, or a hamburger menu. This may be a misguided attempt to make the user interface "cleaner" but it makes it very difficult to find what functionality is available unless you go exploring. This is especially bad for context-dependent functionality because there's no visual indication that the hidden contents of the catchall have changed.

- Delineated targets. A lot of modern designs have flatness as a design concept, meaning the click or tap targets are not clearly separated from the static parts of the interface. This makes it hard to know that they are targets (as it's common to have nonclickable decorative graphics too) and hard to tell where exactly they start/end so it causes extra cognitive load in order to hit them precisely.

- Non-gigantic targets. This is related to the low information density mentioned above. More and more designs target smartphone displays, which used to be very small and require big targets to ensure they could be mashed with normal human fingers. However, this gets reused on tablets, modern gigantic smartphones, and even desktop, where none of this makes sense.

- High-contrast targets with identifiable icons. Low-contrast or monochrome targets have become fashionable. Clickable items often have simplified, highly abstracted icons with thin-line monochrome content, frequently implemented as fonts, which is less distracting from the visuals of the design but is also hard to understand what it's supposed to represent. Another common one is having said elements in grey on grey, making them very difficult to read for people with less than perfect vision.

- Less modality. Many modern designs will have modal interface elements that prevent access to the rest of the user interface until interacted with and/or dismissed. The "blur the content and put a tiny dialog with a huge button in the middle" is a common tactic, and is often user-hostile nudging trying to get the user to do something they don't really want in order to get rid of the thing that is literally blocking their access to whatever they were actually doing.

This is basic human-computer interaction design stuff, but somehow it's all gotten lost.

Ideally, the funds don't primarily come from other people's income, they come from corporate wealth and income (currently severely undertaxed), taxes on natural resource use (currently severely undertaxed), taxes on things we don't want like carbon emissions and other pollution (currently severely undertaxed) taxes on nonrenewable limited resources like radio spectrum usage or land usage (currently not taxed at all or nowhere near proportional to value most places), and direct wealth generation from nation-level investments (sovereign funds, resource funds). The "taxes come from people" is a common way to paint UBI as a self-defeating cycle of redistribution, but that's not how it is. Human income is a dropping fraction of total income, and human wealth is a dropping fraction of total wealth.

Whatsapp imports received images into camera roll by default, and icloud sync is on by default. So you just need to get into a WA group the victim is a member of, and have the victim use default settings.

4th power of magnetic field strength, not temperature. Increasing magnetic field strength increases your density and your temperature, and that compounding is what gets you 4th power scaling.

It's a bunch of trolls from 4chan. They've been doing this for years on freenode trying to accuse the (now former) freenode staff of same.

kicad, implicitcad, reprap, scopehal

This is true. I meant that they are subtle in the amount available when dogs butt-sniff each other. Dogs can detect the tiniest amount, way before a human even notices it's there. The concentrated stuff is, as you say, very intense.

They're smelling anal gland secretions, which are too subtle for humans to detect.

Here's a similar study from three years ago that tried to do the same with clinically relevant measures and got somewhat better results https://scihubtw.tw/https://www.nature.com/articles/s41551-0...

For the fuckers currently running the UK, primarily a combination of inheritance and corruption.

This showed up on HN a few months ago with good discussion on that https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26224709