atoav

More or less. Streaming is often done with 48, video content has ben 48 for a while now, so unless you still produce content for CDs it is the standard.

44100 Hz had reasons no longer really needed (storing audio in 3 samples per line in VHS: 490 lines × 3 samples × 30 GPS = 44100 sample/s).

Qualitywise both are more than enough snd 99.99% of people would not be able to tell it apart in a blind test. Higher sample rates than 48kHz only needed when you want to pitch down ultrasonic recordings (of whales, bats and other such animals for example).

Aside from this higher than 48 kHz sample rates may have only downsides, like increased size and potential distortion in the ultrasonic frequency range that has sidebands in the audible range. Yet there is a persistent, but unscientific "more-is-better"-crowd in the HiFi-sector.

I run the mediatech department in an university. My tech requirement for any infrastructure boils down to three basic questions:

  1. How often do I have to touch it during the next ten years?  
  
  2. How many of the times that I have to touch it are because I decided to do so?  
  
  3. How much pain is it to fix and understand if I had my mind erased?  
  

This often works out in favour of dead simple solutions.

No news to me. Reactionary authoritarians are a threat to freedom everywhere.

As a European citizen I do not trust entities located in the US to not abuse my private data ever since the patriot act.

If it was me that deal would have never came to be. If some EU entity decides to use Microsoft 365 can Microsoft guarantee that it won't give access to one US government agency or another? It really can't. Because if that EU entity wants to act in accordance with EU law, this matters. This is what that deal was for. Basically the EU saying "it is okay" although it never really was okay.

IMO we in the EU need to finally start doing our own stuff that adheres to our own laws and isn't subject to the whims of a mad king. Public Money, Public Code.

In a normal git workflow you have others working on files as well. You can pull their or push your versions via one or more remotes.

Maybe I am mistaken, but the only remote stuff I have read in this article was the clone command in the beginning. Maybe I missed it?

Edit: Nevermind I did miss it.

I mean the cumbersome gold standard is literally just using the program. Fictional dialogue:

  A: Is it possible to pay for a product on Firefox mobile?   
  
  B: Yeah, I manually test it for each new version  
  

Please let us not forget: any automated solution is just there to reduce the amount of manual testing needed.

Of course that is a lot of work and testing every possible combination of situations, technologies etc is probably not feasible, but you shoud have a checklist that you follow, if there are tests you can't automate.

The older I get the more I realise that I have taken way to much of my mathematical intuition for granted.

This I'd an example of people not grasping simple probabilities. Forced to play Russian Roulette they prefer the revolver with 5 bullets in its chambers or the one with just a single bullet, because in both cases people die.

Other concepts many people do not grasp are feedback-loops and exponentials. And by not grasp I mean: You explain it to them, the nod along and when faced with the thing in slightly different clothes they will actively deny it'd existence.

You could say the exact same thing about safety belts and airbags in cars after someone has died in a crash.

Why even bother with measures that prevent many problems if they won't prevent all of them, right?

Okay that must have been speakers that were driven directly by the line signal? Otherwise you'd expect an amplifier inbetween the line input and the speakers.

This intuition isn't true anymore since today many speakers will have "smart" in them and MEMS microphone ICs are a thing.

Counterpoint: anecdotal evidence is sometimes actively harmful and you should consider not sharing it in certain situations.

I know, some people have the reflexive urge to make every situation about themselves, but I think you should instead be aware that (1) your own experience is not necessarily representative of the broader reality and (2) even if it is may distract from the topic being discussed.

Don't get me wrong, everybodies lived experience is in fact valid. And yet that doesn't mean it is appropriate to share it at all times. If your friend tells you their newborn died during childbirth telling them: "Well mine didn't" would be actively abusive behavior. If someone tells you an intimate story about how being poor affected them as a child, there are certain ways to share your experience of how your parents always bought you everything you wanted that productively add to the topic and others that distract from it.

Always remember that everybody just sharing their experience is a different thing from you reacting on some others experience. What may be a fun anecdote for you, may be a life-defining experience for others.

Aside from these examples anecdotal evidence can be destructive if it ignores that the plural of anecdotes is not data.

Well, I have many stickers I like.

The two things you have commented on are not equivalent.

One person offers insight and the other reacts. Such a reaction is inherently on a different plane than a original statement, because you chose to make it about yourself, in the presence of another persons slice of their reality.

To give a crass example:

  A: I had a shitty day, they took my dog and killed it  
  
  B: Well, *my* dog is still alive  
  

To which I would say: Congrats on telegraphing to the world you are a self-centered asshole that wouldn't recognize the concept of empathy if it jumped into their face.

They can, but I have never seen them wired that way in a commercial product.

LEDs can also be used to measure light btw.

By this point this is probably the fourth jj tutorial I have read. I haven't dabbled in it (yet), but this appears to be one of the straighter ones. Meaning not a lot of fluff, a well thought out ordering of lessons and well suited for people who come from git.

One thing I miss is the whole pull/push workflow, but for the rest this appears to be a very good resource.

The word becoming implies it isn't one as of now.

The median age of the population in the US is 39. The median age of the Senate is 65. In other countries 65 is retirement age. So you could say, yes "America" (the US) is a gerontocracy.

If you work with media having a 10G connection on a laptop isn't all that absurd. In fact slow network speeds are the main reason why people have to use things like Thunderbolt instead of using a NAS (e.g. offloading data on a film set).

Very nice. FUTO is the keyboard I keep recommending. The only thing missing now would be a decent dual-swipe support. Injecting single letters with taps during a swipe or continuing a swipe with another finger makes it even faster since it let's you avoid awkward long horizontal "detours" just to hit one letter.

Don't get me wrong I believe there are certain things kids should only be exposed to once they are at the appropriate age. I myself was probably one of the last kids too get a modest mobile phone in my class for example. Especially in this day and age it is important to not train your kid as a screen-junkie from young age onwards as tempting as it may be for young parents. As you rightly mention, this also means parents have to keep their own habits in check.

Please understand that my point was something else. Even with surveillance and bans you can't shield a kid 100%. At school or outside it other kids will bring things your kid will get in contact with. Obviously turning your kid into an forcefully isolated hermit to avoid that risk isn't a good solution, because it comes at a cost. The better solution is to prepare your kid to be confident and rational enough to draw the line themselves as you may not always be there when it needs to be drawn. And you do that be repeatedly let them judge small risks themselves while you're present while showing them you trust their decision.

In practise that basically means letting your kid do things where they could eventually fall and hurt themselves instead of helicopter parenting and padding them in safety cushions constantly.

I grew up during the 90s/2000s and I used the internet, first social media platforms, messengers, etc. – a lot. My parents had no idea of computers, how to use them, how to use the internet, what is out there etc. Yet I am convinced that the way my parents dealt with it is still the gold standard.

Their parenting equipped me well to deal with weird, dangerous or otherwise harmful things I encountered. They were the kind of parents who would let us play in the woods till 9 in the evening, no questions asked if there were scratched knees or dirty cloths. If there was something they thought might be problematic, they talked to us in a way that left the ultimate decision how to deal with a situation with us, displaying a high level of trust into our ability to make good decisions ourselves (and sometimes letting us make bad ones just to talk about it after the fact).

Turns out if you want your kid to be able to deal with unexpected situations you need them to deal with situations, period. And the opposite of that is what I even back then saw with many of my friends parents: trying to shield their kid from every encountering (and mastering!) even the tiniest of dangers themselves, alone. You think you tell your kid about the dangers of the world, so they know, but the actual lesson you teach is that only their parent knows what is and isn't dangerous and that they themselves can't be trusted to judge it. That is a bad lesson.

Don't get me wrong, we did stupid stuff, like jumping of bridges into rivers and so on. But we were very careful about how we did it, diving beforehand, etc. The real stupid stuff in my youth was all done by other kids that had never learned to judge risks themselves and who in one brazen attempt of rebellion bit off more than they could chew in one go. That landed them in the hospital. My brother and I were the only kids in our friends circle who made it to 18 without having broken a single bone in our bodies, despite being regular skateboarders, snowboarders, climbers, cliff jumpers and all other kinds of borderline insane past-times, some of which don't even have a name.

One aspect: Since my parents had no idea what was on the internet and how to protect against specific dangers lurking within it an educational method that didn't have to rely on them knowing and enumerating every danger in the world proved to be a really smart choice in hindsight. Since the landscapes of social media especially for kids and young teenagers is shifting constantly at a high pace, any parenting ideas would need to keep track of all this as well. I can't even imagine how that would work.

The alternative is to ban everything. But how do they build a healthy immune system if they are never even exposed to the mild dangers first?

The problem with GUIs is exactly why CLIs are preferred by many:

- GUIs keep radically changing how they look, at times even removing features, meanwhile some CLI interfaces haven't change in my lifetime

- CLIs are more often designed with synergetic effects in mind, they become part of ecosystems. Meanwhile you get the feeling many GUI applications start having a hard time saving a file to a local hard drive

- the filye types you will tend towards on a CLI are human readable and text based and can be opened in 50 years time without special vendor support

I am not that old, but the reason I like the CLI is simply because I feel GUIs come and go without improving the ecosystem they are in.

I once casted volunteer actors for short movies. It costed me literally nothing to write: "Deadline for application is $DATE, you will hear from us within X days. You will either get a rejection or an invitation to a casting on $CASTINGDATE1 or $CASTINGDATE2."

And on the casting I personally guaranteed for a date when they will get a result. Rejections included feedback that helped candidates understand our decision and improve their craft.

This is in my opinion how you do things when you have a shred of respect for the people on the other side. Actors greatly valued how we did things.

If you can't live with the insecurity of knowing whether you're able to keep those dates, just make a pessimistic guess and add a few days on top. It is really not that hard.

That is what you're saying. I was very clear.

Trump promises a lot of things, while also promising others their polar opposite or flipping 180° once in office.

If you'd back a politician with a track record that bad on any promise, that is probably something telling more about you than the politician.

As a young film student my Prof asked me whether I wanted to go to a talk to which he was invited. It was on the genres shown in German public television.

There the summary of the discussion was: Our core demographic are 60 to 70 year olds which is why we only make shows that appeal to 60-70 year olds and our core audience watches TV while doing household chores, so it needs to be simple to follow, so they can do household chores while watching.

I told them that to me this sounds a lot like circular logic, where they justify the things they are doing with the outcomes that produced. It is obvious there are other markets targeting different audiences (e.g. the likes of Netflix have been explicitly mentioned) and these markets are growing based on the way demographics shift.

A bit like a drug dealer that says he can't do honest work since all his customers are drug addicts, they are using the status quo as an excuse to persist the status quo.

The real way to think about these things is to consider them feedback loops. If all your content targets a specific demographic of course you're gonna have more audience members of that demographic, which again leads you to make more content for said demographic, which leads to more audience members of that demographic which... Until you hit some systemic limit, e.g. you have saturated the market or it turns out your content isn't that appealing to begin with in comparison to other stuff.

That means if you want to be strategic about this you need to give incentives to creators to produce stuff for audiences you don't already have. Even better: you need to become a partner these creators can and want to trust in.

These are the levers YouTube needs to pull if they want to stay a relevant platform that people enjoy spending their time on.

I have used many things to generate print documents and layouted PDFs:

- Adobe Illustrator - Adobe InDesign - Markdown with and without custom themes - Markdown compiled to .idml to integrate into InDesign - HTML and CSS - LATeX

Typst is so far one of the most enjoyable ways of programmatically generating layouted stuff I ever used.

The only thing missing is a good Desktop editor that allows dumb users to double-click a .typ file and see/edit the file instead of having to setup VSCode, plugins etc.

Yes? With sufficient pedantic spirit anything can be argued against. This is what you're doing. So to give a counter-example: You drive with three friends in a car. You ask them: "Do we all want to go to MC Donald's?"

Explain how it is wrong and why it would be. If it is always wrong it follows it has to be wrong here too. The answer is that the meaning of "we all" is context dependent and that friend of yours that argues that we all somehow includes people in the whole city is an oddball that doesn't pick up the context within the words have been said.

We can all go around and make each others day worse with deliberate pedantry by ignoring the context of words, but that is basically just a waste of human energy. If you disagree with the fundamental point I made, argue against it based on the merits of the idea instead of arguing semantics.

If this is in fact an issue where you life, then you should consider stopping to elect politicians that allow bureaucrats to be unaccountable. Or stop believing politicians who rave on about how bureaucrats are unaccountable while they themselves have the power to shape systems where that would not be the case.

A government ideally is a representation of the democratically chosen will of the people. If it is not, work towards making it so. IMO wherever someone says "the government" we should mentally substitute "we all, collectively".

But a specific type of person appears to labour under the illusion that somehow we can get by without we all collectively steering our direction and choosing people who do what needs to be done without commercial interest. Their idea is that instead of choosing people who do it, we just make them compete for who can squeeze the most profit out of dealing with a problem and "somehow" that leads to a better result. When you press them for the details on that part of the mechanism, you will usually get crickets.

Well mine is, see below. Rental managment. Making this for myself and plan to surprise my collegues once it is ready.

The camera auto orientation was 180 degrees wrong after clearing a stage. Maybe you need to give it a sort of "preferential direction"?