TorbjornLunde

I find it strange that when people defend so called “race science” today a common argument seems to be along the lines of “this is correct because some people have negative emotional response to something”. While having a negative emotional response to something certainly isn't an counter argument in itself and isn't a pro argument either! A viewpoint isn't correct merely because it pisses some people off.

Either way, as far as I know, biologist haven't really considered human races to be biologically meaningful category for quite some time now opting clines[1] which are not discrete, but gradual genetic variations over geographic areas, nor does it follow the traditionally defined racial lines. This is why I'm quite suspicious of people pushing so called “race science” as AFAIK it simply doesn't seem to have evidence behind it, rather, it seems to have specific political viewpoints behind it generally.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cline_(biology)

Different moral considerations sometimes come in conflict forcing you to choose between different compromises.

Avoiding harm is a moral principle I'm sure many share and there are cases where this conflicts with being honest. If you go down this “you should never lie” you are effectively choosing to do the harm because you prioritise honesty. Maybe that's right in that situation, but you are doing a compromise between ethical principles in either case.

Personally I used to be never-ever-lie dogmatic, but as I've lived my thinking as evolved and I definitely think there exists cases where lying is the more ethical option. However, it's important to me that it's strongly ethically justified and not just something you do because it's the most easy or whatever.

My bet is the licensing stuff which can make it difficult/expensive to make proprietary apps with it. (In practice, I know the picture is a bit complicated.)

Also, personally, while QML probably is the nicest OOP/bindings style UI framework I've seen, it's still not as nice as any of the reactive ones (i.e. React, Vue, Angular2, Flutter, etc…).

Web != internet.

HTTP, HTML, CSS, JavaScript, etc are web technologies.

TCP/IP (among other things) are internet technologies.

Web tech builds upon internet tech.

TypeScript's complexity comes from trying to model typical JavaScript patterns using a compile-time type system.

It turns out trying to model a dynamic language's typical usage at compile-time is lead to some complicated stuff.

Personally I think it's mostly worth it since most of that is hidden behind API-boundries or (more commonly) in type-definition files and your own code typically either has really simple type annotations or is inferred (i.e. not explicitly type annotated).

But I see your point and it does sorta feel a bit C++-like in this respect sometimes.

One problem with banning plastic straws as well is that many disabled people are dependent on them to be able to drink. AFAIK the alternatives (other kinds of straws) don't work well.

> I always thought this was communism

Communism can be slightly confusing to talk about as it describes both a specific kind of society, ideology/ideologies and a kind of state. It's certainly one kind of socialism.

Communism as society (sometimes called ”full communism”: A) Is class-less This means that there are no groups of people who hold own/power of ”means of production” (workplaces) at the expenses of those who don't. B) State-less: a society that is not organised through a state at all. (This is why the term ”communist state” is funny.) C) Resource philosophy organised along: contribute based on ability, get based on need. D) It doesn't really claim to solve any other problems. This would not be a perfect society, only one without class conflict and state violence.

Communist ideologies are ideologies whose goal it is to attain communism as society. Examples of this are Leninism (what is often meant by ”communism” in the west), various forms of Marxism, Anarchocommunism/Libertarian Communism.

Leninist and other Marxists want to attain communism through a specific kind of state, but this state is a means to an end and the state itself is meant to vanish in the transition to ”full communism”.

Libcom/Ancoms argue that you should just skip the whole state part (and that it would ruin it anyway) and just try to build a communist society (stateless, remember) directly.

(Some philosophies fall between these philosophies.)

Of course, nobody has managed to achieve a communist society (and AFAIK few if any have claimed to do so). If this is possible or not I leave to you consider.

> and that socialism roughly means the workplace is owned by the government.

State socialists (i.e. Leninists, many Marxists, many radical democratic socialists) argue that workers can own their workplaces through a state in which they hold power.

Non-state socialists (i.e. anarchists, libertarian socialists, etc, ) argue that the worker control and ownership much be more direct and that society should be organised in a decentralised fashion.

There are some that fall between these dichotomies.

-----

I'm not a political science academic by any stretch, so sorry if I got some details wrong here.

---

EDIT: One difference between communism and other forms of socialism is that the communists generally more negative to markets than others. This is most clear in anarchist circles where you'll find libertarian communists argue with left-wing market socialists and such.

Socialism means that the workplace are owned and controlled by the workers. You can still have a marketplace of such workplaces.

There are forms of socialism that do include a free market (i.e. left-wing market socialism, etc…)

It's complicated. We are also known for being some of the most conformist cultures in the world.

According to John Sculley’s in the book Points of View a tribute to Alan Kay, Apple invested in Cray hardware in order to simulate what the computing power of a desktop 10 years ahead would be and what kind of possibilities it would offer.

In 1987, Apple also invested in a Cray XMP 48 super computer which enabled our engineers to experiment with what real time manipulation of multidimensional objects on a screen would look and feel like many years before such computational power would be available on general purpose personal computers.

You can buy the book or download a PDF of it for free here: http://vpri.org/pov/

Anybody used it compiled to JavaScript? What’s your experience? How does it compare to TypeScript?

While this talk could be said to be a talk where he points out problems but don’t show solutions.

Anyway he has a talk here which at least show some more recent examples of what he considers a better way: Is it really "Complex"? Or did we just make it "Complicated"?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubaX1Smg6pY

In this he talks about two programming languages: Nile and OMeta which allows them to solve some problems in very few LOCs (among other things).

I think Oculus Rift i combination with something like Leap could lead the way for useful 3D-interfaces. I don’t like the term VR reality. To me it’s the skeuomorphism of the 3D-world. Instead of trying to simulate the real world, why not use 3D to express more abstract concepts (like we already are doing with 2D screens).

Of course, in time something like holograms will be more relevant, but in the mean time I think things like Oculus Rift in combination with other technologies can be a nice stop-gap.

Talking about “true” feminism is almost meaningless (or at least very imprecise). There are several strands of feminism. Radical feminism in particular tend to have a complete disregard for men’s issues, but my experience is that there are many moderate feminist who do care about gender issues on all sides.

I think Adobe have slowly killed Fireworks for years by slowly letting it languish (as opposed to the swift axe that cut Freehand).

I’m always annoyed when Norway is called socialist. It’s social democracy (which I think could be called socialst-capialist democracy). I think the same applies to many european countries.

Rasmus is also behind the original design of Spotify interaction design, branding and more. He is one of the most talented designers I know about, this is really good news for Dropbox!

Movist has a “navigation mode” that works well as a simple Front Row replacement.

I strongly disagree that reversibility is a small feature. Whenever Plugging the chargers to new iOS devices is effortless the same way as headphones jacks.

Non-symmetrical connectors are an affront to usability.

Really cool. Does something similar exist for Ruby?

I disagree, there is a lot of design that still feels quite modern, especially within furniture (Dieter Ram’s famous shelving system holds up quite well for instance). If you go for a timeless style it’s usually the technology limitations (size for the product for instance) that gives away the design.

Looks really interesting. I’ll definitely consider using this. Seems great for collaboration.

Idea: integrate something like this with a version control system like Git(hub)?

“Engineers shouldn't think about design.”

In my experience engineers who think a little bit about design work better with designers than those who don’t.

AFAIK it was only a part of that was moved to Scala. The web interface is still written in Ruby.

More: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter#Technology

It depends on the target audience. I agree that there should always be some difference between non-visited and visited links. Also, if your website’s main audience is Joe User I guess having it in a color (if you play it safe: blue) is an advantage as well.

However, Dustin Curtis’ site is not for regular Joe, it’s for geeks. In general I think it’s okay to break some usability conventions as long as you are aware of what you are doing. It’s also about what you want to achieve. How much attention do you want to attract to your links? Maybe you only want people to notice links if they are looking for them, or maybe you really want the links to stand out.

Very interesting, but the Flash-based player of this is not very readable. Is it available as a PDF?

Because Apple has been inspired by them, not out-right copied them.

Apple take ideas from Braun and put them into different contexts (products). Samsung have taken Apple’s ideas and put them into the exact same context (or so the argument goes).

Another reason: The Braun designs that Apple have been inspired by are decades old by this point. Most of the Braun products don’t have these designs anymore (Aside: IMHO I think they current design is inferior to a lot of their older stuff.)

EDIT: Removed something that I don’t think was accurate.

I imagine this is primarily meant for creating static content such as print posters.

(I see that they are working on a web version, and regarding that I have to say I agree.)

You might want to check out Flow by MetaLab. They have a really native iPhone client and quite desktop-y web interface.

http://www.getflow.com

There has been quite a debate in the wake of this, and the our anti-terror institution have admitted that no increase of power and knowledge of their part would likely not have done a big difference. It is apparently extremely difficult to detect people working completely on their own, almost regardless of resources.

Some of the focus in the debate has been more about how to avoid people ending up with value systems (or mental disease) that permit and promote such horrible violence.