YPPH

This is actually a pretty good idea.

Whenever things like this come up with the non-tech folk I deal with, the conversation tends to turn to "Oh, well, I don't have any of that sort of stuff, so nothing to worry about", or "Good, child abusers should be in jail".

What are people's talking points against these views?

The contention the moon landings were faked is ridiculous. The most obvious rebuttal is that the USSR would have asserted it if there was a modicum of truth to it.

Related question: Is there any way to view HEIC files on Windows without installing the extensions from the Microsoft Store, or dodgy proprietary software? Even Irfanview requires the former.

I generally agree, but:

>99.99% of the time a DoS is someone who is bored. Talking to them tends to work.

This is an overstatement. A great number are extortionists or state sponsored attackers. They're not interested in chit chat, except if it's to negotiate a price to stop the flood. Particularly not the ones commanding resources which are sufficient enough to make a dent in the operations of a substantial commercial entity.

Take one basic feature lacking from the web client - bulk printing all of the emails in a folder. That should be enough to show the web client is not fit for purpose. Not to mention all the organisations relying on extensions.

Very tacky move from Microsoft.

>I have ever yet to see any ad that actually made me buy something because of the ad

That's a somewhat superficial understanding of how advertising works. Sure, Barry might see an ad for McDonald's and go out and buy a Big Mac, but a lot of the work is subliminal.

Why does anyone donate to positive social causes?

Be careful using strong language like "nonsense" unless you're very sure that's you're right. For starters, it's hostile. Also, I think you're incorrect.

Who do you think determines whether or not a particular voice is an 'artificial' voice? The FCC or the Courts? If it's the former, that's Chevron deference. You haven't quoted any legislation which expressly confers power on the FCC to interpret the law (which is typically the province of courts) and determine themselves whether or not a particular 'voice' is an 'artificial' ... 'voice'. But the legislation, at least arguably, impliedly confers that power per Chevron - like in Chevron, it was within the EPA's power to determine what a "source" of pollution was.

Compare Australia, where Chevron deference was rejected as forming part of Australian administrative law (Enfield v Development Assessment Commission (2000) 199 CLR 135), it would be a question for the courts whether the agency was authorised to make this regulation, without deferring to the agency's interpretation. The agency does it's best to conform with the law, but it's ultimately the courts that say what the law is.

Windows just keeps getting weirder. There's this regrettable dichotomy between (1) a rock solid OS core with great features like Hyper-V, PowerShell and exceptional back-compat, and (2) a crap, sluggish, inconsistent UI slapped on top, laden with ads, "Rewards" Points and tracking.

Go on, start imagining. You wake up to make your toast, press the button down, and see:

* Sorry, you must complete a critical system update before proceeding.

* Wi-Fi unavailable, please check the network.

* Your AccuToast (TM) subscription has expired. Please update your details on the web.

* Non-genuine bread detected, please ensure you purchase AccuToast (TM) certified bread.

* Tampering detected, contact manufacturer.

Also Australian - agreed.

I got a toaster and kettle combo from a premium appliance manufacturer for Christmas. I've since seen the exact same kit in Aldi under their own brand. It's not just similar, it's the exact same product.

For testing, I find https://www.mail-tester.com/ helpful.

I don't mean any disrespect, but I made an incredibly basic doc - the JSON export is unlikely to be helpful, and the HTML export is essentially broken for a lot of features, such as an equation.

I think that getting perfect PDF exports should definitely be up there on the priorities. Might help you hone the document model too.

Gee whiz, the scope of features is super impressive at such an early stage. It's a very unusual experience to be able to integrate pretty much any object in one module into another module - a big conceptual shift.

Can I suggest you include a dummy workspace in each user's account demonstrating the product to its full potential? Or at least give me an option when creating a workspace to make it into a demo. This might not only benefit the user, but you too, as you'll have to think about the purpose of the product and how it can be leveraged in a business context.

Good luck.

You're right. Regrettably, I just read that Haneda is one of the handful that have it, but the system was broken.

A great example of how an aircraft accident is almost always a result of multiple things going wrong.

https://abcnews.go.com/International/japan-airlines-flight-c...

I do agree it's inappropriate when it is invoked in reference to divine intervention. But not when it is simply used to describe something extraordinary. Take "Miracle on the Hudson" - I think it's fair there, it's incredible every person survived a water ditching. Miracle is a fair word to use.

It's hard to know what that is. TCAS is a great example of an obvious solution to mid-air collisions - two devices seamlessly negotiate for one plane to go up, the other to go down.

One I can think of is an electronic runway "lock". ATC mark the runway as locked to a particular aircraft. The landing aircraft checks at minimums whether if the runway is locked to any other aircraft. It's harder to know how to prevent incursions at ground level, but it could be a beacon near the runway threshold and intersecting taxiways, flashing a warning in the cockpit of the taxing aircraft if an aircraft on final holds the lock. A pilot could still disregard it. Sometimes two planes can share the same runway, such as a plane lining up while another vacates, which adds further problems.

I'm not aware of any system like this.

Assuming (1) the replacement is a better solution, and (2) it is feasible to retrofit every aircraft in the world and switch everyone over to it.

Just in relation to (2), I can't really think of anything worse than having two communication systems on operation at the one airport - everyone must be using the same system.

Pilots are accustomed to the immediacy of voice communication, which any electronic system will struggle to replicate. More sophisticated radio than simplex VHF has too many variables, and agreeing on an international standard would be challenging.

There have been some developments of a replacement of, or at least a supplement to, simplex radio. But none are as cheap, quick and reliable as verbal communications with readback.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controller%E2%80%93pilot_data_...

This argument lacks substance. Are you suggesting the benefits of emissions-free operation are set-off, wholly or to a substantial degree, by the emissions produced in the manufacture of those products? The answer is clearly "no". There is a net benefit. That is all that is needed, and it's not a marginal benefit, it's significant.

Context: https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/08/polish_trains_geofenc...

A pilot's 'flight hours' is regarded as a key measure of their experience.

If a pilot only ever trained visual approaches in sim, and not the real world accounting for the overwhelming majority of their flight experience, that number would be meaningless.

>It's not clear who's in the wrong here; just an unintended consequence from many well-intentioned decisions.

Attention should be given not just to what was said, but how it was said. It is obvious the controller was frustrated. It conveys the impression that at least part of his decision-making was influenced by spite and not good intentions.

Does that stop you getting spam SMS messages?

The same was said about Windows 11. We were told, by none other than Microsoft, that Windows 10 would be the last version of Windows.

https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/7/8568473/windows-10-last-ve...

The major advantage of AA/CP is they are simple screen projection protocols capable of being supported for decades.

The "brains" of the system, namely the phone, can be easily upgraded as technology changes. People will get new phones. Operating systems will be upgraded. Apps will come and go. Maps will update. The system will keep working flawlessly.

This can't happen with fixed hardware in vehicle - the firmware and apps will be promptly outdated.

The burden of proof doesn't work that way, and your initial comment offered no elaboration about why it was plagiarised. An explanation was called for.

Do you have any evidence the article was plagiarised from the source, other than the fact they write about the same thing at about the same time? It's a pretty serious allegation.

On an error of process or because the outcome is wrong? An "appeal" can mean either of those things. If it's the former, that's a substantial limitation.