abhorrence

It's interesting to see what types of features these models don't distinguish well. For example, I've noticed that a lot of models have trouble with giving lady bugs distinct spots. Instead they usually end up with a big black splotch.

How?

Often child actors (like Wil, for example) don’t actually want to be actors and it’s just overbearing parents making them do it. Naturally, for many of them, as soon as they reach adulthood and gain more control over their lives, they don’t continue a career in acting.

I’m curious, which key do you think is the easiest to play on piano?

I’ve found that newer folks tend to prefer keys with fewer accidental: C, G, F, D and Bb

Whereas there is a tendency for more experienced players to prefer keys with many flats: Db, Ab, and so on…

And (appropriately for the submissions topic), I think lot of this preference comes down to the fact that we tend to learn keys like C first, because the notation is simpler and it’s easier to remember the spacing. However most of the pianists I’ve talked to who prefer the flat keys will prefer them because of “how they fit under the hand”.

And even if they did, the stems of the notes (excluding half and whole notes) traditionally are as long as the distance between octaves. One of the things that I think makes traditional notation more robust for experts is the redundancy of information.

It also helps that for many instruments there’s a mapping between the layout of the instrument and the notation! This is less true for brass and the violin family, though I think even with them there are probably some arguments to be made about the harmonic series, or the spacing of strings in fifths.

> Of course Mulan had come out before this (same year but March vs June)

For anyone who was panicking over the passage of time when reading this: Kung Fu Panda was released in 2008, Mulan came out in 1998.

Lots of companies engage third party companies that give "industry averages" or "comparable company averages". The company pays them with dollars and also their own average pay information.

None of the companies are explicitly getting together and saying "let's keep pay at this level", but there's definitely some fishy stuff going on.

I think it's important to note that some of these sports organizations are _requiring_ specific uniforms for women that are far more revealing and sexualized than that for men.

I think if we took the reverse analogy, this would be like a situation where depending on the model of car you owned you could only shop at a specific grocery store.

Bought a Honda? Only Kroger for you. Ford? You get Albertsons.

There's a sizable purchase with phones and computers that creates a cost to switching stores. There's no cost to me to go to Kroger one week and Albertsons the next.

Something like Amazon is more comparable to grocery stores, but I think there's a "trust" cost that makes them not directly comparable.

For others’ benefit, Mt Gox (of Bitcoin fraud fame) was originally “Magic The Gathering Online eXchange”.

As I recall, in one of the antimemetic stories they can (with some intentional effort) remember and describe what it isn’t: “It isn’t... round.”

I think it depends a bit on the generation. I have a 15” MBP that inconsistently connects to the usb devices connected to the monitor. And I have a 16” 2019 one that has never failed to connect properly to the exact same setup. Of course there could be a different configuration of monitor and usb devices that my 16” would fail to work consistently with.

There are at least some examples of startups choosing to apologize, and try to make things better in the future.

I think the real advice is “don’t say sorry unless you actually mean it.” People see right through that, because your actions and follow through won’t match your words. But people seem to appreciate sincere apologies that come with substantive corrective action.

I would argue that most states aren't prioritizing based on need. They're prioritizing based on risk if covid is caught, where they ought to be prioritizing primarily on risk of catching covid (with perhaps some secondary prioritization for risk if caught).

Under such a scheme, we'd have vaccinated anyone who has a hard time isolating, e.g. grocery store workers, nursing home residents and staff, prisoners. Instead most states are first vaccinating retirees who can easily avoid infection.

I assume they're referring to Rand Paul (and also Ron Wyden) who have both made assertions that the executive branch has it's own secret interpretations of the laws that were passed post-9/11. The laws themselves are not secret, but what the government thinks they authorize is.

I count seven: right, right, reason, right, right, regrets, rest.

With what pronouns you're allowed to use to describe yourself? Or what pronouns you're allowed to use to describe others?

I think you'll find that pro-choice folks are split (perhaps many different ways) on this question. Personally the way I view the problem is through the lens of minimizing harm to all parties involved -- and as such, I wouldn't say that it's "not wrong" to kill a fetus, just that in most cases it is the lesser harm than forcing a woman to carry an unwanted child and to bear the life long responsibilities that it entails.

In that lens, imagine a scenario where a woman is happy to be pregnant and excited about becoming a parent. Then she learns the child will be male, and she decides to abort it. There's a wide gulf between between the harm of "didn't want to be a parent" and the disappointment of "didn't want a son". It may help to imagine this with even more trivial features: "oh the baby is going to have blue eyes? never mind then...".

For something like trisomy-21, I find myself of mixed mind. On one hand, there are many things that can happen to a child through their life that could end up posing a similar impediment to the child and burden on their parent. On the other hand, since we're able to detect it so early, perhaps it is the best way to minimize harm.

This is an interesting idea! You could even add weighting into these implicit reviews so that they are less impactful than an explicit three star review, but would still have the effect of pulling towards the median. It’d help to prevent the “five stars is acceptable, not stellar” problem that these rating systems all devolve into.

Everything you’ve said about marijuana applies to the alcohol industry. I’m not sure if you’re suggesting marijuana should continue to be outlawed, but if that’s what you believe, do you also believe we should outlaw alcohol?

It's more that they're equally out of tune in every key. What actually sounds "best" for a given key (though certainly a little strange and unusual given the pervasiveness of equal temperament) would sound quite out of tune in other keys.

Twitter's actions prompting legislators to be interested in modifying section 230 is different than Twitter not acting in accordance with section 230. Section 230 explicitly allows them to moderate, and says that they do not lose their protections just because they do some moderation.

Section 230 also says:

> No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of— (A)any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected

With that it seems reasonable to read Section 230 as "you don't have to proactively moderate, and any good faith moderation you do doesn't break that protection".

Regardless of whether or not this is the right thing for society, it seems that Facebook and Twitter are well within the bounds of section 230 to do some moderation without losing the protection of section 230.

The difference here is that valve has implemented the apis for the purpose of compatibility with existing software, which is explicitly a protected use by law.

I know several former clerks. Their own political leanings frequently do not align with the justice the clerked for, though I assume they tend to know what types of arguments will be more likely to sway that particular justice.

Ruby meets most of those criteria. It also had a more graceful (though not without its pains) Unicode transition, as it allowed you to mark file by file the status of string literals.

Do you make an effort throughout the year to write down all the awesome stuff your directs have done?

It also depends on the interconnectedness of the population. Person A may not be very connected, only being particularly likely to infect their own household, and maybe one or two other people outside. Person B might be highly connected and in a position to infect dozens of people. If you had a population of 80% "Person A" and 20% "Person B", this might average out to an R0 of around 6 -- but the actual reproductive rate would drop rapidly as "Person B"s gain immunity.

You can do it the other way around. If the signature seems fishy, you set it aside unopened, and only do further validation before opening it if the election is close enough for it to matter.

For example, in an election with 100 votes cast. If 10 signatures are suspicious, you only do extended validation and open them if the election was won by a margin smaller than 10.

There actually are very few legal restrictions on naming minors. There is substantially more scrutiny applied to false reporting when it involves accusing a minor of a crime. Most of the time when publications refuse to name a minor it’s because they promised not to while obtaining the minor’s name.