SimplyUnknown

Because the folks doing it are doing it for hobby and therefore it is good but corporations are doing it for profit so it is wrong.

Tracking others is okay for me but not for thee.

I'm only saying this partly in jest but I think it is conceivable that this line of defense is used by these communities and is absurd.

I do agree with you: a basic level of privacy should be there for everyone from (almost) everyone. In this particular case ATC should track aircraft and ensure that not everyone is going in any airspace willy-nilly.

Pick the Netherlands, for example. No way to buy any (smart)phone.

If reproducibility is so important then why are we in the middle of a reproducibility crisis? [1]

If reproducibility was really that important then the scientific body would be more focused on replicating results rather racing to being the first group to publish an idea or securing funding.

Scientific foundations are seldom challenged or refuted. The last paradigm shift in physics or maths was over one hundred years ago. And as soon as someone challenges them (as the author does) the criticisms are refuted.

Say what you will, but science is mostly a social affair. Works of prominent groups are more likely to be accepted than works of groups with less status in the scientific community. Belief in scientific work may not rely on faith, but it is a far cry from pure scientific method.

I'm not trying to be cynical here and do think a good scientific body advances humanity, but the current state of the scientific community might be closer to religion than one hopes it should be.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

I think an analogy would be the following: You need to hammer a nail in a piece of wood. You could do this with a screwdriver but hammer is better suited for the job. However, a hammer made out of glass is less useful than the screwdriver.

In other words, some kinds of tools are better suited for a problem than others, but there exist tools that inferior even though they were designed to solve your original problem.

You should pick the best tool for the job. It might be unclear what that tool is and some tools are better than others at solving the same problem, even if they are designed to solve the same problem.

I'm speculating that "slow down" in your first quote means "the flow doesn't plummet towards zero when it's busy" and in the second quote it means "reduce their average velocity". So in that sense they don't slow down (i.e. the colony doesn't grind to a halt) because they slow down (i.e. literally slowing down)

Again, I'm speculating about the meaning but if I'm right then it's a poor choice of words from the author.

Ah okay, yeah I see what you mean. You are definitely right. RIP everyone with a pacemaker or another type of implant within more than 22km of that system. Implants are usually safe up to 5Gauss so that would be beyond 22km, I guess.

I looked it up BTW, and the maximum extent of the fringe field for a 1.5T MRI scanner drops to 1Gauss at about 4 meters from isocentre. Fun fact, the field strength of an MRI scanner refers to the strength at isocentre, whereas the maximum field strength generated by a 3T scanner is beyond 11 Tesla.

What problems exactly? The fringe field of an MRI is only a few meters outside the bore before it drops off to 1 Gauss. Especially with all the shielding around the machine there is not really a problem with it with normal use. The power consumption of the MRI machine itself are also pretty modest. To keep the magnet on field and superconducting you'll only need to power the helium pump.

The biggest power consumer in an MRI system is the gradient system, which is only necessary for generating images. These need powerful amplifiers to generate the RF pulses.

I really like Telegram. Only end-to-end encryption by default and in group chats would make it perfect.

Forgive me if I can't read but I couldn't quickly find the following. Is it possible to use Opmsg as a library?

If you want to use GPG as library in your application right now, you can't. The best thing you can do is parse GPG output which is ... less-than-ideal at best and downright wrong and dangerous at worst. If one can use this as a library rather GPG that would be a huge win.

I have worked at my nation's meteorological office and they (and I'd assume others do too) provide this service. They do this by running an ensemble (at our office, a population size of 50) with different starting conditions of numerical weather prediction models, rather than a single run. This will give you a confidence in the predictions of the numerical models. Besides general forecasting, they are also using this for hazard triggers so it can basically answer questions like "In the next 72 hours is there a 50% or greater chance that wind speeds will be higher than 30 knots at the biggest airport?".

My new theory is that he is Bill Wurtz

I'm still more comfortable with an antihero that is down to earth and knows when to shut up like Linus than with a full-time worshipped Hero persona, e.g. Elon Musk.

I'm subscribed to this for a few months now and I must say that in general I'm pretty positive about it. However, it is usually a mixed bag of topics and the perceived quality -- or actually how much I enjoy reading the curated articles -- differs from day to day. Some days it is just a collection of "I did this thing in Typescript/Vue/React" type of articles and it just happens to be my preference that I dont find most articles about front-end dev not that interesting.

However, there are more than enough more "fundamental" articles in it every week. Whether it is about computer graphics, language theory or something about quantum computing, it is generally a nice mix. And I like that you can vote on the emails whether you like them or not (I don't know if this does anything but the idea is nice).

Oh, and I think that the "I already read this one on Hackernews or /r/programming" is pretty low.

Keep it up, Pek

There's nothing wrong with it. As you say, many quality products come from this kind of work.

However, you can read this article as saying: "The only way you can sell software is by listening to customers and building exactly what they want." Which often is "We are using [Insert Tech Name] and it doesn't support feature X."

This narrative is clearly false. Many good products are built and monetized by just building something what you think the world needs or you think is fun to build. Again, many more of these software projects have failed using this strategy. Many good products are built and monetized by listening to customers and building what they want. And again, many poor clones that add no value are built using this way.

It is a two-way street which is not reflected in the article.

I don't know how this differs with installing Hackintosh on real hardware, but then you provide a kernel extension (kext) called FakeSMC, which emulates the SMC chip present on real Apple computers.

So in a sense, he is not using an actual SMC key, but very probably replaced it by FakeSMC. You can see that it is actually included in the repo he clones: https://github.com/SRH1605/Hackintosh-KVM/tree/master/kexts/...

The Netherlands also had rebate for personal computers, called the "PC privé plan" (Private PC plan), where bosses could give their employees tax-free computers with a maximum of about 2300 euros at the start, which was cut to 1500 euros near the end of measure. This lasted from 1997 until 2004.

Funny, I have devised almost the same mantra:

- Make it

- Make it correct (i.e. test/prove it works always)

- Make it fast

There is always some mixing going on but I think it is a nice way of building software.

How is this radical. People who have invested in knowledge (e.g. via taxes) should be able to access that knowledge, i.e. reap the benefits of their investment. There is nothing radical here.

Sure, I get that this is radical in the sense that some leeches' industry will dry up. That's a good thing but it puzzles me how we got in this situation in the first place.

My bike has the same problems as my convertible car: It gets flat tires, I get wet when it rains and it costs more energy to go uphill. Is my bike now a convertible car?

The definition of a social network is not in its problems but in its features.

And I'd say one of the defining features of a social network is discovery (e.g. new people, groups that share a common interest, etc.). This is completely lacking in WhatsApp - as you already need to be able to "have access" to the people you want to talk with before you can contact them - but is the integral experience with facebook or instagram.

Funny that your link includes WhatsApp as a social medium. I don't see it like that at all. For me it is just a free alternative to SMS. Besides, they say it is big in Latin Amercia but in my country, Holland, I would guess that by now it is present on >95% of all smartphones. (latest source I could find was from 2016, which states that 92% of all smartphones in the Netherlands have WhatsApp installed, https://tweakers.net/nieuws/109689/whatsapp-staat-op-11-komm...).

I would consider reddit, missing in the article, more of a social network than WhatsApp.

The focus I dislike most about this article is that a PhD is considered a means to an end. The author compares that opportunity (financial, mental, physical) is lost that is somehow to be compensated by having a PhD as opposed to people that don't have one (big surprise, it isn't).

Also, the metric of success seems to be here how much you earn and how many startups you have founded. If these are your success metrics then don't ever even consider doing a PhD or moving out of Silicon Valley.

There is of course value in the critique that PhD programs can be oppressive with a toxic culture and depression. One has to consider how big this risk is within your program and if one is willing to take it. Thinking you can tackle these issues within your department is beyond naive.

With regards to learning new stuff and finding and scoping interesting problems of your own: People don't seem to realize that it is your PhD program. You are in the lead of the direction your research is taking* . Advisors are there to advise you and not the other way around. If you are just following orders when doing a PhD you are doing it wrong.

To conclude my tangent rambling, if you are going to do a PhD do it for the right reasons. Money, fame, titles and number of startups founded are IMHO not valid reasons to consider doing a PhD. If you are doing a PhD you can shape your research the way you want and be advised by your advisors, not the other way around.

* Terms and conditions may apply. You are still (usually) working of course within a grant to solve one huge problem, but the way you solve it is mostly up to you.

Depends. Suppose you take those new-fangled school districts just built in the fifties. Are they better than the global average? Likely. Are they better than the average school district in America? Possibly. Are they better than the average school in your state? Maybe. Are they better than all those new school districts? Definitely not.

I would love to go fully FLOSS on my phone. I would even love a dumbphone better. I just need/love to use my smartphone for a few things:

- Spotify

- Google Maps

- Sygic car navigation

- WhatsApp/Telegram

There are just no viable fully FLOSS alternatives for all these services, AFAIK. Last time I had Lineage+MicroG these services kinda worked, but I didn't have the time to invest such that it would work as smooth as the closed source counterpart. Maybe I'll try again soon.

Bear in mind that (in my country) this is averaged over a 24 hours. So you will see fewer commercials during daytime but a lot of commercials during primetime such that it averages to 12 minutes per hour.

> You can be an outdated API module

Nice.

Still though, I assume the issue is larger than "some game from over 10 years ago is not working" and is more like "an entire API is not working"? If so, this also has serious consequences for higher-impact applications as, for example, in a professional setting like CAD. It would reflect badly on AMD if they "intentionally" break things, or at least intentionally not fix them.

The EU does that for them. It's anything that can be traced to an individual. Same goes for 'handling personal information'; it's literally everything you can think of where PI comes into play.

The sales page is nice and all, but this is the page that matters: https://www.apple.com/legal/privacy/en-ww/.

TL;DR: we collect the shit out of you and share it with third parties as we see fit. If you disagree you will get a crippled experience

What other options do you have if you want a smartphone? I severely doubt that other devices (most notably Apple) are any better. I think that if you don't want this to happen you have to buy a dumbphone, which may or may not be an option for some people.

> Keep a journal of sticking with this habit. I always print current month, put it up in my kitchen and I cross off days. I'm currently doing that for my diet, but it works for any habit you wanna build.

You mean like a calendar? The "string of unbroken crosses technique"? Or do you mean something else?

There is another side of ToS in the Netherlands that I haven't mentioned: The ToS has to be reasonable. There is a blacklist which cannot appear in a ToS under any circumstance because it is unreasonable to ask from users. For example, it is illegal for a company to require users to agree that when they buy goods from their shop they cannot return it whatsoever. There is also a gray list: these are conditions that companies may ask users to agree to if and only if they can prove it is reasonable condition. Notice that this a reverse of the burden of proof: normally a user has to prove that some terms in the ToS are unreasonable which is hard. Now the company has to prove that their terms are reasonable, which is also hard but better for the user.

For example, it is illegal for companies to document the religious beliefs of a person BUT if this is a service for certain religious community (e.g. a forum for a church) then the term that they have to disclose their religious belief is reasonable (given that they don't share this information with anyone, of course).

As for the ads, I don't know. It might be unreasonable to have users agree to subject themselves to third-party ads in order to use the service. But again, I am not a laywer.