bnj

If the reason it doesn’t make sense to include the (faster, more power efficient) MacBooks in reviews is that windows users would have to see way higher value before they’d even consider switching… then shouldn’t that just be stated in the review? That the purpose of the review is to compare x86 laptops?

If a review is looking at hardware, and MacBooks are out there, shouldn’t they be included for the benefit of people who are actually trying to understand their purchase options?

Also by asking the FEC to weigh in and approve this before moving forward, google is in a much stronger position: if they’re not approved to move forward, the FEC can now be the bad guy; if they do approve to move forward, then they don’t get hit later because the FEC gave the stamp of approval.

Thanks for responding, this is definitely easier from a computer.

I reviewed summaries from NAEP for reading and math [0] and found that across the board, public schools appear to outperform "public charter" schools. I understand that the received wisdom is that public schools are failing student. Certainly there are many public schools that don't increase, or actively harm, outcomes for some or all of their students. But the premise here is that the public system is fundamentally broken, and it should be substantiated.

> Please let us know what incremental improvement you are suggesting

The Hunt-Lee Commission recently released a final report for improving North Carolina Public Education Pre-K through University with 16 proposals[1], broadly categorized as "Build on what we have", "Invite and test new ideas", and "Implement proven solutions". Proposals such as these were what I had in mind when I originally wrote of incremental improvement.

> I think keeping poor kids in a crappy school where they will come out barely able to read will continue generational poverty and is a risk of the current school system.

Yes. The crappy school you mention should definitely be improved. But that's not what this bill does; this bill puts the burden on families to take their kids out of the crappy school and find a better one for them, leaving the crappy school in place along with the students of families who, for whatever reason, aren't able to move their own kids.

[0]: https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/dashboards/schools_dashboa... [1]: https://hunt-institute.org/news/hunt-lee-commission-releases...

If platform licensing arrangements don’t protect customers from losing access to purchases, they should be forced to advertise them as rentals or leases and not something the consumer is buying.

Doesn’t this position rest on the premise that the public education system is “broken”?

Here’s a premise for public education: Continuous investment and incremental improvement will yield better outcomes than starting from scratch, particularly where starting from scratch means providing a mechanism for public education funds to be funneled into private enterprise.

Setting aside the practical barriers for families to individually navigate providing quality non-public education for their children, which are substantial, this kind of approach introduces a whole range of new risks. If a family with five children is facing poverty, loss of housing, and financial instability, it might start to look appealing to take those five kids and sign them up for homeschooling so that the funds can be used for some education and for survival. Those aren’t the kinds of risks that financially secure families will ever have to face.

Can a new law explicitly permitting behavior that wasn’t previously prohibited really be said to be alleviating restrictions?

Laws are inherently restrictive in the sense that things which aren’t prohibited by law, are permissible. So a law which codifies that something is permissible is useful for clarity, but it doesn’t really release citizens of restrictions.

I’m honestly surprised to see so many responses in this thread that diverge so wildly from my own.

It was inappropriate for this instructor to join the chat and silently surveil their students. When they saw the students exchanging information like that the first time after forgetting about it, they should have posted a warning on the thread and left.

Some of the energy of analyzing their students cheating would have been better spent looking at how to make the assessment of learning more resistant to a student sharing a screenshot of a question.

This is what I ended up doing, and even though the majority of the notes I take aren't things I'll need to return to -- they're more about processing in the moment -- just consistently using an iPad to capture into apple notes has scratched the itch in my brain that I might need to look back at something someday, and it's well worth it.

I also am pleased that I can use it to scan any piece of paper I'm given straight into a note and that same scan will pop up when I search for it.

Honestly it doesn’t seem pernickety to evaluate the article on its claims. The system is presented as “universal”, and the opening sentence asks us to enumerate the qualities of a perfect system that would work for everyone.

curiously I was able to find it (broken into sections) via Western Electric directly:

https://www.westernelectric.com/library#technical

I really enjoyed this read, disappointed that I haven’t been able to find a digital copy of the western electric handbook.

> What they should use is the number of cases tax workers can deal with.

I'm curious about this and not completely sure I understand what it would look like in an example. Would you be willing to expand on the point?

Why should cost of living be a factor in pay determination?

This reminds me of the same phenomenon that occurs in traffic planning[0]

[0]: https://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm64.htm

Briefly, as impediments to congestion are introduced (bike lanes, tolls), individual cars either join or leave the traffic system until the delay for cars reaches a rough equilibrium based on what people will tolerate.

Seems the same is true for computing capacity.

Almost like a hardware extension of the Single Responsibility Principle

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-responsibility_principl...

This would go a long way to addressing one of the key needs that we’ve been planning around: a central library to manage all the different documents and datasets that are accumulated by different teams.

We’ve sketched out an initial solution which looks a lot like Secoda, except focused on csv files, the concept being to check csv data sets into the library, add metadata, and then define how to bridge it into the central data store.

I’ll dig further into the website, it looks like you’ve done a lot of good work avoiding repeatedly addressing the same questions!

My understanding is that Apple is going to publish a hash of the database, so a user would be able to compare the hash of the database on their device with the published hash to be “assured” that the same dataset is being used everywhere.

Not the parent you're replying to but it sounded from the post like it's because they develop apps on apple platforms and need them for work.

Do you feel similarly about prosecuting corrupt police officers for abuses of their powers, or is the insistence that criminal behavior be prosecuted limited to protestors?

Having read the coverage and the documents that Apple has been putting out to manage the … what, crisis? Backlash? … I’ve been thinking about the design of the system and how I would want CSAM to be detected, if different than this.

Honestly, I’m pretty impressed by what this approach accomplishes. Your comment says this obviously isn’t the way to do it— what’s better than this?

In a legal context where detecting CSAM is a strong requirement, what’s preferable to this approach?

A curious outcome of the scrutiny that the system design is receiving is that it will make it less effective at the task of catching actual collections of CSAM.

Page eleven promises something I haven’t seen before: that Apple will publish the match threshold for each version. Meaning, even if after all this, there are abusers still using iCloud photos to manage their illegal collection of CSAM, they can check back to know what number of images is safe to keep.

A twisted version of the Streisand effect.

Well when Apple releases the next OS it will automatically OCR all images, so one possibility is just downloading them all on an Apple device.

There are virtually unlimited quantities of free to consume media - TV, Books, Movies. People don't pay more money for new creations because the older works aren't published or available.

Relaxing copyright restrictions after a more reasonable period (seven years) doesn't take value away from new work, it enriches the public commons in a way that encourages the creation of new culture.

A tiny portion of cultural works remain profitable after the first few years. Grant seven years of copyright automatically, and let creators purchase extensions in five year blocks that increase in price. $100 for five additional years, $1000 for five years after that, $10000 for five more, $100000 for five more. It makes no sense to barricade all cultural works behind a copyright wall to protect the tiny slice of properties that continue to pay dividends after a generation.

Maybe add a [2010] to title

This is a great point, thanks for adding that detail.

Yes but my understanding is that the hashes are perceptual, as opposed to cryptographic.

If the system was matching against known cryptographic hashes the collision / false positive rate would be small, but the fuzzy matching involved with perceptual hashing necessarily has a greater false positive rate.

And that doesn’t even begin to address the detection of sent and received “explicit images” which are detected on device and don’t have a set of known hashes.

I think an important part of the battle for attention is that excel is visible as a GUI that inexperienced users can open from an icon and see and manipulate. A simple GUI utility with Python input in one pane and data input in the other might put them on more equal footing.

I wish this piece had moved beyond finding out about a new word and what it means. It felt like it could have been the introduction to a longer piece about actually learning to stop worrying about unread books, but instead the author seems to have trailed off in a mirror to the books the piece focuses on.

Is the discovery that other people have a word for the accumulation of unread books really enough to make the attached anxiety melt away?

I'm the grandchild of librarians on both sides, and I've had the urge to archive and catalogue and preserve and retain for my whole life. It's crippling. There's a perverse illusion buried in the need to collect and archive books and possessions. I wish the author could have done more than scratch the surface for me!

It looks like I was wrong to assume that it was tied to the .edu domain name -- I thought notion was using that as a way to avoid pouring resources into verifying eligibility.

My wider point is that it's disingenuous to have a bold heading [0] "Free for individual students and educators", and then in the FAQ lower on the page state:

"You're not eligible if...you're a k-12 student or k-12 educator"[0]

[0]: https://www.notion.so/product/notion-for-education

Thanks for the recommendation!