NonNefarious

I didn't say it was their fault. I just said they're ignorant and lazy... which stands. I drive amongst them every day, and have for decades.

I didn't notice this auto-revving behavior, however. I was driving a Ford in England, so maybe they don't have this "feature."

Yes, keep modding INFORMATION down, Redditards.

In the USA we have sport-utes, which was the original term for SUVs. Don’t know why that was forgotten and replaced with MORE syllables, but there you go.

Now we have no small trucks, and a continued parade of bloated, impractical junk that manufacturers are pushing as “small.” The new Ford Ranger and Chevy Colorado stand out as regressions from their former incarnations, and the Maverick is another joke. They all force giant four-door cabs and puny beds on all buyers.

Thus they lack the usefulness of a proper truck, and the safety of the “utes” you describe.

Talk about entitled. First off, this is a CHAT system, not document storage. If you want permanence, send E-mail (and archive it).

Second, it’s FREE. Case closed.

That statement is contradictory.

Great. That means nobody is going to steal my car, and I won't have to let valets drive it.

So what? The question stands.

The term is “key/value.”

It's "built-in."

Or add a descriptive phrase to a headline. Heaven forbid.

What an asinine excuse. "It makes sense if it makes sense to you." And "snowflake" wasn't capitalized, so it wasn't a proper name. And even if it were (as it is now, having been fixed after I posted the above complaint), it would be just another douchily obscure headline on HN. If you're too lazy to say WTF you're talking about in a headline, don't burst into tears when you're called out on it. And, oh man, you're not even the OP... even more pathetic.

It's depressing to see insecure infants infecting HN with Reddit-style tantrums just because somebody said something mildly critical. If you're too gutless to demand better, at least STFU when others do.

Went to use my invite, and OpenAI demands your PHONE NUMBER.

No excuse for it. Screw that.

That's fine if the controls work without significant lag. Last week I drove a minivan whose blower speed was controlled by a multi-purpose knob, and each speed change took several SECONDS to be affected. Pathetic.

That's the rationale, for sure; but for mechanical features physically built into the car that can't be altered by software, there should be physical buttons.

I don't even like electronic climate controls. I drove a minivan last week that had a click-wheel for the blower speed, which inexplicably suffered from a several-second lag. Yes, multiple seconds before the fan speed changed, making the selection of one a ridiculous pain in the ass.

And any UI that makes you poke at a button or twiddle a dial to iterate through a list one item at a time, without showing the whole list at once, is a monumental failure. You see this blunder way too often, when there should simply be a drop-down list for a finite number of options.

He doesn't mention the reactor in the original comment, at least not as it's presented here...

To be picky: If something costs 2X more, the other item needs to come in at 1/3 the price, not 1/2.

After several big-name routers that all sucked ass, and finally one that got hacked, I switched to Ubiquiti products. I have an EdgeRouter X and an AP AC Lite.

After several years of use, I can say that Ubiquiti software and support are trash. Their configuration app (I used the iOS version) almost never works, meaning that it almost always fails to find the AP that is one foot away from the phone. It also suffers from unprofessional UI-layout defects. Their Mac app won't run until you manually strip quarantine flags from it because it isn't even signed... then it won't run because it relies on Java 8, and Mac OS hasn't shipped with Java in a decade. And if you jump through enough hoops to get it to launch, it fails to detect any Ubiquiti devices.

Once I somehow tricked their iOS app into communicating with the AP and got it working, it did work for years and has pretty good range.

But now (and this appears to be a somewhat common problem), the AP randomly stops sending data on 2.4 gHz. Here's one of several posts about it: https://community.ui.com/questions/AP-AC-Pro-problems-with-2... And it appears to afflict multiple products.

This can last from minutes to days. Although you're connected to it, you can't even hit the router. Ubiquiti support is utterly useless; it's as if they do everything possible to drag out interactions until you go away, providing vague, terse, one-sentence answers every couple of days that contain no specifics.

My impression is that Ubiquiti is just hanging on, coasting on existing technology and doesn't even have support staff that knows how it works.

GoDaddy are known assholes. Take your business somewhere else.

You can float strawmen and invalid analogies all day, if that's how you get your jollies.

What more do you want to know? I just told you what they did. I put a shrink-wrapped box of Autodesk software on eBay and they threatened eBay in order to have it taken down.

No; it implies that WE own it.

I can complain because corporations enjoy purchasing advantages not available to individuals. Massive amounts of capital, for one thing, not to mention tax breaks and economies of scale that make it easy for them to dispense with financing and inspection contingencies.

When an elderly person dies and the children who inherit his property all live out of state, they're going to dump the property and split the proceeds. And they're going to maximize those proceeds and minimize the time to realize them. Corporations can take advantage of that.

So no, WE did not decide to sell. Think it through.

So your thesis is that people decide to become homeless to retain their social network?

How many people are ejected from "the lowest-priced area?" I guess we can exempt all of them, then.

But nowhere in L.A. County (for example) is the lowest-priced area.

And regardless of where the next one might be, are we really to believe that living on the street is a better choice?

Citation?

I agree about the housing speculation, but I challenge the (oft-repeated) assertion that this has caused homelessness. If you could afford to pay SOME rent in an area that got more expensive, then you can move to a less-expensive area and pay the same rent.

And what are we doing about CORPORATIONS buying up our neighborhoods?

As far as I know, NOTHING.

Autodesk's behavior has long been acknowledged as despicable, marked by such offenses as attacking instructional fan sites and managing to get some ignorant judge to rule in favor of their rip-off licensing scam. They claim that when you buy their software, you only buy a "perpetual license"; so if you find that you can't use the software, you can't sell it to someone else. If you tried to sell an unopened, new copy of their software on eBay, for example, their lawyers would threaten eBay and have your auction canceled. Yes, they did this for ONE copy.

Can't innovate anymore? Just behave like assholes.

Great story, well-supported. I'm going to adopt this philosophy from now on, solely on the strength of your arguments.

Apple bought FCP from MacroMedia, and its internal design was a mess. You can see amateurish data-structure blunders if you look at FCP XML files.

The UI also suffered from the asinine floating-window fad that afflicted the Mac for much of its existence, being a glued-together mass of individual windows that prevented you from minimizing, resizing, or moving the FCP UI.

That was far from the only UI gaffe. Remember when footage would go missing, and you were presented with "Find" and "Locate" buttons right next to each other? WTF.

But... you could get work done with FCP 7. No doubt about it.

Apple cleaned up the floating-window mess with FCP X. But it failed to fix fundamental mistakes from the earlier version. Most crippling is its continued failure to distinguish between clips (media files, which reside in bins) and timeline events (sections of the clips that are used in the timeline).

An event should always point to a clip. That makes it easy to (for example) apply an effect to all the uses of a shot, or to just one instance of it in the timeline. If you want to apply an effect to all uses of a shot, you apply the effect to the clip. Otherwise, you apply it to one or more tineline events. Easy, right? But you still can't do that in FCP X.

To make matters worse, Apple misuses the term "event" to mean... I don't even know. Some kind of dumb iPhoto-like auto-organized group of media by date, I think. That's ignorant of industry standards and definitely not professional.

Also unprofessional is FCP's overly "helpful" timeline. It's a chore to edit your footage with frame-level precision, which should NEVER be a problem today.

And I have no idea why you couldn't open old FCP projects in X. Plenty of other vendors (and even other groups at Apple) wrote parsers to ingest that poorly-conceived XML schema and turn it into something useful.

Which means it should have resumed after the ~three-year window of so-called "Millennials."