anotherturn

Agreed - documentation lacks in frustrating ways at times. For example the docs [1] for migrating to their new python client are still lacking despite cornering developers into upgrading (don't offer support unless you've upgraded).

[1]:https://www.twilio.com/docs/libraries/python/migration-guide

If any change is going to be made it's going to come through revolution (a la France) or through someone in the top 1% changing things from the top down (a la slavery). The fact that he gets around on a private jet is neither here nor there - we can live with hypocrisy. What we cannot live with is inaction.

When all the answers are found, science will stop.

As a scientist you cannot accept that what you know is the final answer. Our knowledge of the world around us should be constantly subjected to the closest scrutiny, because the answers we have are almost certainly incorrect, or incomplete.

Any reason the authentication mechanism doesn't work? Unable to log in / use forgotten password. If we want to update our tag line, skill set on offer there doesn't seem to be any way to do this..

Kudos to you.

My recommendation - https://supporters.eff.org/donate - they seem to be the only organization fighting to keep the internet open and accessible allowing technologies and services like bitcoin to exist and grow.

okay, I will bare this in mind for future submissions

Given twitters track record upholding user privacy in the face of lawsuits and the like [0] I'm somewhat skeptical that they'd play ball with United in this way.

I'd suspect it's more likely that United and their twitter drone army are "reporting the tweet(s)" as "abusive or harmful" and if enough twitter users do that it would make sense that twitter would auto-remove / moderate said tweet.

Of course, it's strange that the originators of the tweet don't get notified or see their tweet after moderation - so I'm likely wrong.

[0]:http://time.com/4731403/twitter-donald-trump-alt-uscis-lawsu...

I recently read Dan Brown's Inferno - not a great reference work by any stretch, but some compelling arguments are made along the lines you suggest.

I suspect there is a lot more to it than just limiting the numbers of babies born. If there are more resources per person (a consequence of fewer people) then we will likely see the resources used per person go up.

Anecdotally - American cars are terribly inefficient with respect to fuel consumption. This is I think partly due to the low cost of fuel. In the UK, however, the cost of fuel per litre is almost double that of the US, and consequently people gravitate toward much more efficient vehicles.

Additionally - China has been a huge polluter for quite some time despite one child policies though admittedly it's partly because the global economy outsourced their pollution to China to a degree.

It's likely to have been run through an author obfuscation tool which mangles the language to avoid stylometry detection.

I love the sound of a dive computer HUD - though I'd be curious to see how it would be affected if your mask leaks. I guess the 'watch' would still be present - probably a good idea as masks can get lost (I had mine accidentally kicked off by a fellow diver once).

I do take issue with your assertion that certifications can be cast asunder. A lot of what's learnt is about safe diving (e.g. don't dive after you fly, safer dive profiles, what to expect at different depths wrt buoyancy changes, dci, getting narced, etc.) and what to do when technology fails.

Wetsuit buoyancy has a due to neoprene is pretty handy if you surface and are in distress. If you're towing an unconscious diver, for example, and are only relying on their bcd to keep them afloat their legs drag terribly (as is the case for dry suits) and it makes the rescue very very difficult. There are other safety advantages too - it's not clear to me why getting rid of buoyancy is a great idea.

This popped up on product hunt for me today. It's not clear to me how this is different to straight up RN with other libraries e.g. https://nativebase.io/ or https://github.com/jondot/awesome-react-native . Care to comment?

The 6 second thing is a little bit of a mistake that sensationalizes the story. He actually ran off course for 2 miles and missed some of the checkpoints - full text from the race director below [1].

Obviously this race is pretty hardcore and the people that participate are freaking awesome! The race should be sensational based on that alone, but alas journalists need to add a little more spice...

    A message from the RD of The Barkley Marathons #bm100:

    i wish i had never said 6 seconds...

    gary had just come in after having run off course
    and missing the last 2 miles of the barkley.
    that is, of course, not a finish.

    i do, however, always record when runners come in,
    whether they are finishing a loop, or not.
    so, i had looked at the watch,
    even tho there was no possibility that he would be counted as a finisher.

    so, when someone asked if he had gotten in before the limit;
    i foolishly answered.

    i never expected the story to somehow become that he had missed the time limit by 6 seconds.
    he failed to complete the course by 2 miles.
    the time, in that situation, is meaningless.

    i hate it, because this tale perpetuates the myth that the barkley does not have a course.
    the barkley is a footrace.
    it is not an orienteering contest,
    nor a scavenger hunt.
    the books are nothing more than unmanned checkpoints.

    the boston marathon has checkpoints.
    and you have to show up at all of them or you can be disqualified...

    that does not mean you are allowed to follow any route you choose between checkpoints.

    now, the class with which gary handled this terrible disappoinment
    at the end of a truly magnificent performance...
    that was exceptional,
    and is, in and of itself, a remarkable achievement.

    but he did not miss the time limit by 6 seconds.
    he failed to complete the barkley by 2 miles.

    laz

[1]:https://www.facebook.com/trasie.phan/posts/10212547374898805

I'd love for this to be true, though I remain skeptical as "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"

For example, the chap who claimed he had built bird-like wings suitable for launching a human into the air[0] garnered a lot of attention until it was revealed to be a hoax [1].

Some similarities between the two videos. Low resolution. Lots of chopping and changing. Involves human flight - a naturally exciting area and excitement can suspend rationality.

[0]:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojSkxF6Qq_c [1]:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newsvideo/weirdnewsvideo/915...

I also have javascript disabled, and selectively enable it for websites as required. For me it's less about security and more about disabling annoyances e.g. assisted scrolling and such.

On the security point, there are some answers out there relating to javascript in tor [0]. Basically it's not a risk per se, but it does increase your risk surface area.

[0]:https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/40620/why-is-ja...

accurate ˈakjʊrət/ adjective

1. (especially of information, measurements, or predictions) correct in all details; exact. "accurate information about the illness is essential" synonyms: correct, precise, exact, right, errorless, error-free,

A typo is the antithesis of this.

However, as I mentioned in my previous comment the content is of value and to find fault in the guise of typos is absurd.

Typos happen all the time - I was going to suggest that it was a bit of an unfair comment. Then I opened up their website [0] and their strapline is "In fraud prevention Accuracy Matters"...

None the less it is a useful document for those not versed in the basics of opsec and there's likely more value in insightful comments on the content...

[0]:https://www.forter.com

I don't know for certain but I suspect it may be more due to the calorific density of meat. Grazing on vegetation is a full time activity leaving zero time for other activities. Whereas if you only have to have a single meaty meal in a day you can spending the rest of the day planning your next hunt.

I think the Global Priorities Project [1] has that covered - at least to first order.

"Definition: Global Catastrophic Risk – risk of events or processes that would lead to the deaths of approximately a tenth of the world’s population, or have a comparable impact."

[1]: http://globalprioritiesproject.org/

There is plenty in the world that needs fixing. But as is the case with startups - if you try work on everything nothing works.

Focused* effort brings about the greatest likelihood of success.

*I realize I'm being a bit hypocritical as I'm proposing working on fixing oceans (which will have plenty of added benefits wrt climate change etc.) as a side project to bring about change; in addition to my full time freelance dev work.

First I laughed, then I thought. Perhaps one could build something akin to Google Page Speed, but instead it provides a measure of green-friendliness? It detects expensive animations, overloading of javascript, etc. I reckon the React community wouldn't like it much though...

The question is - if the whole internet uses 10% less power, does it make enough of a difference given its growth rate?

Kind of like the star rating system from Black Mirror?

People are quick to forget though? I can't think of a film or book that brought some ethical misstep to the fore and changed human behavior en-mass over the long term?

Edit:

I guess religious texts could be used as a counterpoint.

I was vegetarian for about 6 years but didn't have quite the same experience as you (in the early 2000's). By and large I was met with incredulity or confusion. Top Gear using the word "Vegetarian" as an insult didn't help matters either :p

Votes only count if the people you vote for can be counted on. Those people are often very thin on the ground, hard to identify (it could be a political masquerade) or are unelectable because the voting majority don't like them.

This is exactly what I was thinking, though clearly failed to communicate. I already do a number of the things mentioned but I feel like it makes very little, if any difference.

From the comments below I've stared thinking of some things I can do by putting my dev skillset to use:

* contact Ethan Brown of Beyond Meat to see if there's anything he could do with my volunteer hours

* Investigate whether there is an issue with finding locations for windfarms and if that is a real limiting factor in having more. Seems like a simple enough problem to solve

All great suggestions. Something that seems like it could be a side project would be to "Make it easier to find locations for wind mills." I suspect at present the primary limiting factors are locating areas of land that are

(1) windy (2) accessible (3) cheap to develop?

I don't have a car so tend to take public transport or walk. But that aside, I recall reading that heavy industry releases a great deal more CO2 than all cars on the roads and that cars are a bit of a red-herring. No source though so I could be wrong.

Shipping, yes. That is a great polluter - good shout - though it primarily applies to food right? It's tricky to buy everything locally-produced e.g the mac I'm typing on. Shipping exists in part because raw materials are spread throughout the globe.

I suspect that the population of every country is too price sensitive for this to make a dent. Take for example ethically produced clothing, food, etc. While they are big industries they can barely hold a candle to their less-ethical counterparts.

From what I see, relying on good intentions doesn't quite seem get us to where we need to go.

This is an interesting suggestion - though I'm not sure of the net effect of iron fertilization? How much iron achieves what?

I guess the legal fees cover dumping of anything ranging from nuclear waste to rubbish destined for recycling? I'd assume one could get those waived if there was a proven positive effect of the fertilization.

You seem to have redacted your comment - but if I recall correctly your suggestion was to go ahead and evangelize but asserted that I would fail because I mentioned "shock and fear tactics"?