andrewzah

In my experience it doesn't take very long on a new keyboard set or even a new layout entirely before one gets fairly up to speed. When I built my Lets Split v2 ortholinear, I put dvorak on it and getting up to speed was surprisingly fast.

The ergonomic reasons behind the lets split/ergodox make them quite worthwhile. I love my HHKB2 but a split keyboard in general feels much better for my posture.

My apologies, will edit.

It's called that because they made it specifically for their grandmother. Do we really need to state that it's going to depend on the particular person and their needs?

Also, that grandmother is _96_. That is not even remotely close to someone in their ~70s. It is also dependent on the person: one of my grandmothers (around 70) doesn't like ipads, and can operate phones a little bit. My other grandma, similar age, loves her ipad.

You're being downvoted because you're treating this like a generalized business pitch, when it's a specialized hardware project someone did for their own grandmother, and gave it a cute name based on their language. If I made something specifically for my grandmother, I might include "bunica" in the name. Seeing as that's what my whole family calls her, and its a way to say grandmother in Romanian, which is a gendered language.

Also, I fail to see how the gender of the word for grandmother here is relevant for the discussion. Grammatical genders (also called noun classes) are not necessarily related to human sexes, but I digress.

"However, that is, by definition, perverse."

I don't think that's by definition wrong for stardew valley. That's your interpretation based on the intro. The developer might not find it perverse to play that way at all.

People just play games differently. I like to keep the wiki open, but not go to lengths to min-max. My brother likes to min-max and be efficient as possible.

The beauty of games is that they allow different playstyles. I will say that Stardew tends to push towards min-max because time moves so fast. That's how I felt, anyway. Playing with a mod to slow down time about 25-30% made the game much less stressful.

"but the abuse potential is massive."

I think people grossly exaggerate this. We have libel and slander laws. Individual companies aside, entire communities of people aren't that stupid. In my opinion, this is a really pessimistic view of people and also not based in reality in my experience.

At the end of the day, we need to be able to listen to victims. The amount of fake accusers compared to real victims is microscopic.

"And people who are accused are damned, period."

Not really. There are literally countless examples of accusations/allegations and nothing happening to people for whatever reason, usually influence/popularity.

Someone should coin a law for this phenomenon: Every single time a ~~woman~~ victim makes a public statement like this, in the comment sections a man must be discussing false accusations or the court of public opinion. I don't think I've ever not seen this.

People who are abused are damned if they do, damned if they don't.

edit: removed specific gender

edit2: I'm not trying to be inflammatory here. This is a phenomenon that I've noticed over the years.

I must be going to the wrong conferences!

Everything lately in the frontend world seems to be optimized for developer comfort, not performance.

"You have to compare the same high quality headphones, the amp with the same DAC, with the same recording, being played through a high quality filter bringing everything down to 44.1kHz/16bit."

I agree. If there is a methodologically sound study showing that people can actually distinguish (>50%) between 44.1kHz/16bit and 192kHz/24bit on the same hardware [at exactly the same dB SPL], then I will be really surprised. It's not physically possible to hear those differences, as far as I understand it.

"Vinyl is able to get a slightly better S/N ratio in perfect conditions."

No. Compact Discs have an SNR of 96dB. Vinyl typically has an SNR of 60-70dB. The physics of these mediums aside, CDs are a newer technology... Why would we have gone for inferior distribution mediums?

"Most likely, CDs just don't get mastered right. The music is compressed and so even though the format is better, the music is worse"

Compression like that has more to do with radio play + the genre of music. Thankfully, the loudness wars are mostly over, but generally speaking the actual distributed master would've been the same.

"This isn't the fault of the format, but the result remains, digital music is objectively worse."

Please provide such objective citations. Mixing and mastering engineers do their best to make music that sounds good on a variety of audio systems. When I worked in a studio, we would mix on $8k genelec monitors, some cheaper monitors, and also test the mix in our cars and on our phones. Part of the art and difficulties in that was producing a mix that sounded good on great to average systems, and passable/decent on like mono phone speakers. Music and music hardware has never been more accessible than today, so I find it hard to believe that everyone a few decades ago had such amazing systems compared to today.

"Vinyl is sold to people who care about sound"

Citation needed. There are people who just want vinyl because it looks cool (especially the colored limited releases), and they go play it on a $50 Victrola all-in-one. There are CD enthusiasts who have systems worth > $200k.

"CDs are perfect - vinyl often introduces imperfections that people like to hear."

This is totally subjective. A CD is a bit-for-bit perfect representation of what the author wanted to distribute. The actual things like "warmth" that people talk about depend much more on the pre-amplifier, amplifier, and speakers.

There is nothing wrong with liking LPs (I collect them myself), but they are in no way, shape, or form better than the bit-for-bit perfect distribution of CDs (that also don't degrade every time you play one).

"Most awful are cds having only 16 bits and 41kHz sample rate, by modern standards really poor."

44.1kHz is all that one needs for -perfect fidelity-, given that humans cannot hear higher than ~20kHz. See: Nyquist-Shannon Sampling Theorem. [0] 16 bits of quantization gives a Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) of 96dB, and noise dithering increases that [1]. More bits are not necessary unless one is doing music production with that audio and warrants the extra headroom, before mixing back to 44.1kHz/16bit for distribution. [1]

The only thing that higher bits/sampling rates do for a listener is waste CD and drive space, so it is odd to lament 44.1kHz/16bit as being "really poor". Even if your speaker setup can actually output extremely high frequencies, only your dog will be able to hear it...

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyquist%E2%80%93Shannon_sampli...

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20181109203430/https://people.xi...

That doesn't make any sense. RIAA EQ is a serialization format, that is then decoded by your audio equipment. That's what the phono jack is for on a receiver, pre-amp, etc.

What people "hear" regarding LPs is generally their biases + their particular analog setup. My setup is going to sound totally different than yours, regardless if it's from a CD or an LP.

There are some cases where an LP had a better -master- than a CD for the same release, but that is due to the publisher/owner of the master tracks and not the actual medium itself.

Digital stores need to update their terminology to reflect that you don't actually -own- what you buy. So many people are confused by this as it's counterintuitive.

And this is why piracy is, and will, always continue. I legally buy movies and then have to deal with DRM and other nasty, annoying things that only affect paying customers! People who pirate have no such limitations to deal with.

It's only bad when we don't like that country, I suppose.

"If a country is known to have a hacker program"

In other words, any modern country?

Drives should be zeroed before getting sent off anyways.

This is why I built a home media server with Jellyfin and Navidrome. Nothing will "go away", short of a fire or multiple drives failing at once. I keep a physical copy in a separate house, and back up the essentials with duplicacy to backblaze b2.

In the last few years I've spent more than ever on cds through discogs.com.

"Sadly that option is becoming less and less possible as many shows become streaming platform exclusives."

Certain websites say otherwise. Luckily my main focus is music, where nearly everything I want is already in the used market, so the original artist won't see any money.

That sounds like a personal problem, and not really gender related. You should ask yourself why you're having difficulties treating people the same especially in a game.

I want proof that the motive was in any way, shape, or form, related to or sponsored by a foreign government under the cover of university research. Not speculation based -solely- on the nationality or ethnicity of the accused.

"Maybe that's what they claim to do,"

Our society is built on trust. Do you test the water from the city every time you drink it? Etc. Days like today show that, yes, the kernel team is doing their job.

How about -you- prove that they -aren't- doing their job?

"Suppose you use some company's service and they refuse to cooperate in regards to pentesting ... Is that unethical?"

Yes. You are doing it without their consent. It is unethical. Just because you think you are morally justified in doing something without someone's consent does not mean that it is not unethical. Just because you think the overall end result will be good does not mean that the current action is ethical.

"Yes, but only because that's illegal, not because it is unethical."

This is very pedantic. It's both illegal and unethical. How would you like if it you had a business and random people came by and picked locks, etc, in the "name of security"? That makes zero sense. It's not your prerogative to make other people more secure. If they are insecure and don't want to test it, then it's their own fault when a malicious actor comes in.

"Again, there's nothing morally wrong with "stealing" someone's wallet and then giving it back to them"

Yes, it is morally wrong. In that scenario, you -are- the pickpocket. This is a serious boundary that is being crossed. You are not their parent. You are not their caretaker or guardian. You are not considering their consent -at all-. You have no right to "teach people lessons" just because you feel like you are okay with doing that. If you did that to me I would not hang out with you ever again, and let people know that you might randomly take their stuff or cross boundaries for "ideological reasons".

"Because the risk of running into a physical altercation is quite low, as is the risk of getting arrested. "

This is admission that you know what you're doing is wrong, and the only reason you do it digitally is because it's more difficult to receive consequences for it.

I strongly urge you to start considering consent of other people before taking actions. You can voice your concerns, but things like taking a wallet or picking a lock is crossing the line. Either they will take the advice or not, but you cannot force it by doing things like that.

"I suggested this was an attack on critical infrastructure using a university as cover and that this was a criminal/counter-intellgence matter"

There is absolutely zero evidence of this. None. In my opinion it's baseless speculation.

It's far more likely that they are upset over being called out, and are out of touch with regards as to what is ethical testing.

That is expressly the opposite goal of open source. If you arbitrarily say foo user cannot use your software, then it is NOT open source. That's more like source-available.

Nobody would continue to use linux if they randomly banned people from using it, regardless of the reason.

[side note] This is why I despise the term "open source". It obscures the important part of user freedom. The term "Free/libre software" is not perfect, but it doesn't obscure this.

The kernel team literally already does this by the very nature of reviewing code submission. What do you think they do if not examining the incoming code to determine what, exactly, it does?

"because I value kernel security above petty ideological concerns"

This implies that this is the only or main way security is achieved. This is not true. Also, "valuing kernel security above other things"... is an ideological concern. You just happen to value this ideology more than other ideological concerns.

"whether something is ethical is an opinion"

It is, but there are bases for forming opinions on what is moral and ethical. In my opinion, secretly testing people is not ethical. Again, the difference here is consent. Plenty of organizations agree to probing/intrusion attempts; there is no reason to secretly do this. Again, security is not improved only by secret intrusion attempts.

"there's no doubt that many illegal (and arguably unethical) acts of hacking have improved computer security"

I don't believe in the ends justify the means argument. Either it's ethical or it isn't; whether or not security improved in the meantime is irrelevant. Security also improves in its own regard over time.

I do agree that the way the current laws regarding "hacking" are badly worded and very punitive, but crimes are crimes. Just because you like that hacking or think it may be beneficial does not change the fact that it was unauthorized access or an intentional attempt to submit bad, buggy code, etc.

We have to look at it exactly like we look at unauthorized access in i.e. business properties or peoples' homes. That doesn't change just because it's digital. You don't randomly walk up to your local business with a lock picking kit to "test their security". You don't randomly steal someone's wallet to "test their security". Why is the digital space any different?

Well, if there's no process, then it's not ethical (and sometimes, not legal) to purposefully introduce bad commits or do things like that. You need consent.

Firstly, it accomplishes nothing. We already all know that PRs and code submission is a potential vector for buggy code or security vulnerabilities. This is like saying water is wet.

Secondly, it wastes the time of the people working on the linux kernel and ruins the trust of code coming from the university of minnesota.

All of this happened due to caring about one's own research more than the ethics of doing this sort of thing. And continuing to engage in this behavior after receiving a warning.

Linux kernel vulnerabilities affect the entire world. The world does not revolve around the U.S., and I find it extremely unlikely a university professor in the U.S. doing research for a paper did this on behalf of the Chinese government.

It's far more likely that professor is so out of touch that they honestly think their behavior is acceptable.

No. There are processes to do such sorts of penetration testing. Randomly sending buggy commits or commits with security vulns to "test the process" is extremely unethical. The linux kernel team are not lab rats.

I learned it from a 3-min TED talk [0]. I didn't realize it had a proper name.

[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAFcV7zuUDA

Yes! Maintenance and refactoring is a huge creative opportunity, if management isn't thwarting you. Dismissing languages and maintenance outright makes think the author is just difficult to work with. Even in modern places, maintenance and refactoring simply need to be done every so often. That's part of the job, we can't only work on things that we want on someone else's dime.

This is certainly true. Being bored to a large extent is a personal choice. Things can be as interesting as you make them, but it requires looking at things from different perspectives sometimes.

Getting paid appropriately to do work that you genuinely enjoy is a privilege. It certainly is nice if it works out that way, but most of the time it does not. A lot of the work that needs to be done in the software world (that pays well) is just not terribly interesting.

My work is not always very exciting, and that's okay. I work normal hours and have purchased my own beautiful home at 24. After work I have freedom to do whatever, and enough money to pursue pretty much any hobby that I want. My employer sponsors books, courses, and conferences, and provides great healthcare.

I would rather have a stable, but boring, job over being broke and working on something interesting.