cabalamat

If the sender is on the recipient's allow-list then it goes straight through. Otherwise the recipient has to solve a captcha. This allows humans to send small numbers of emails easily, but makes it harder for spammers.

Also, recipients could have deny-lists and automatically share them with others they trust. The deny-lists might be a list of senders' cryptographically generated IDs, in which case it should be reasonably hard to generate new ones (e.g. 10 minutes on an X86 cpu using an algorithm not conducive to parallelisation or special hardware).

> if the recipient system would require an ε payment to the recipients' public wallet

And allow recipients to whitelist senders who don't need payment.

Maybe new-email could be linked to a cryptocurrency?

Artbreeder (https://www.artbreeder.com/), though it's limited in what it can do.

> Left of which centre?

The median of English-speaking people, presumably.

> Napoleon caused the first real world war

If yuo don't count the 7 years war.

Bangle looks like an interesting project.

I tried using it but couldn't get it to work. It relies on keystrokes like Ctrl-P and Ctrl-Shift-P, which I dislike for 2 reasons:

(1) it forces people to remember commands when they shouldn't have to. GUIs have used menus, buttons etc for this for ages.

(2) Perhaps importantly, it doesn't work for my setup (Firefox on Linux), where Ctrl-Shift-P opens another Firefox window for privater browsing.

Also I note that File System storage only works with the Chrome browser. This is probably a good thing because I do not want random web pages being able to look at my filesystem!

>I'm not confused that in <Ap>, the Ap thing is a child of the angle brackets; and calling it (frob (A p)) doesn't help much in this regard. However, at least you can search literature for the word frob more easily than for angle brackets.

Also it's perhaps more likely to occur to the person using the frob notation that maybe they should define frob somwewhere.

> I think a real problem in this area is the belief that there is "one true notation" and that everything is unambiguous and clearly defined.

One main cause for this belief is that in a programming there is one true noation (or rather, a separate one for each language) that is unambiguous and clearly defined.

I dislike maths notation as I find it lacks rigour.

I got a "disable your adblocker" message, so I just read it on Reader mode.

I've been using my CatWiki[1] for making notes since 2016 and find it quite easy to use. It stores notes as Markdown files on a local hard disk.

[1]: https://github.com/cabalamat/catwiki

> Smalltalk/V on DOS (1980s) had extra runtime royalties payments

That's something i don't recall (it was a long time ago).

Looking at the data from gapminder[1], the USA spends more (typically, several times more) per capita than any other country on healthcare, and receives worse outcomes (in terms of life expectancy) than all other rich countries.

Example: USA $8360/person/year, 78.9 years; Singapore $1730/person/year, 82.8 years.

People who don't have health insurance are often shafted, but even people who do have health insurance are too: https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/04/24/employer-provided-heal...

Healthcare is probably the single most broken part of US society/economy.

[1]: https://www.gapminder.org/tools/#$model$markers$bubble$encod...

> instead of spending thousands of dollars a seat on Envy/developer.

It wasn't the cost of Smalltalk that was the problem, as there were low-cost implementations of Smalltalk, such as Smalltalk/V available on PC from the mid 80s onwards.

> It just goes wrong when no-code advocates put the cart in front of the horse and make grandiose claims about replacing all developers or something

"no code" like most IT industry buzzwords over the last 70 years, is mostly bullshit but with a kernel of useful truth.

The "how it works" section is just some short soundless YouTube videos that don't explain what is going on. I think they need to work harder on explaining their product.

I'm using Firefox and don't get that message. Obviously if you do get it on Chrome, that's a bad user experience and needs to be changed.

It says on the front page "Add you.com to Chrome to get started" which to my mind implies that in order to get started you have to be using Chrome and add the extension to it.

You don't have to, you can just use it as a web page, the text is misleading and should be changed.

> Breaking DRM for personal use should not and cannot be illegal

Agreed, including fro other people's personal use.

Companies should be allowed to protect data by copyright or DRM, but not both, i.e. encasing something in DRM would remove its copyright.

> Really, doesn’t the idea of gathering a team for a status meeting feel quaint in an era of ubiquitous instant messaging?

No! Talking to people face to face is infinitely better than using shitty messaging apps like Slack.

That makes sense -- only give a tag an id if it needs one. It only needs one if ti's being referred to somewhere, and when that happens the user can give it a name, such as "thing" in this example.

> That's fair but it's trivial to convert a BinaryTree to a LinkedList (doubly or singly)

If there's a way of doing it that's trivial, and another way that's complex, I will do it the trivial way unless there's a very good reason to do it the complex way.

> The practical use case for in-place algorithms is operating on large data sets that are directly on a disk. Think some kind of database organizing data directly on a hard drive.

I just hope the system doesn't crash while it's in the middle of doing it!

> as if to imply that being a sitting President gives Trump greater legal right to a social media account

That's not what they're implying.

The implication is that if they can do it to the office-holder of one of the most powerful jobs in the world, they are very powerful and can do it to you.

> the narrative of social media being an organized supranational conspiracy

When lots of social media companies do the same thing at the same time, what other explanation is there?

> Chinese are the majority of the world population.

No, they are roughly 1/5th of it.

> Is it really a terrible idea to restrict your software from being used [to do all sorts of things]

Possibly. If the list of restrictions is ill-defined and ever-changing then it opens up a can of worms, which in practise means no-one will use the software.

Exactly.

> only for purposes in line with ml5.js values

There are 2 caveats to that:

1. they can change their values at any time

2. they can decide at their sole discretion that your use isn't in line with their values, and you have no recourse.

> It's something like a bar with a "no racist language" sign: anyone can use the bar

The difference is that one wouldn't use the bar as a platform to build a business on, whereas one might build a business on software.

> I agree with your hesitance and apprehension of how it could could go wrong.

There are 2 issues:

1. the CoC is a "living document" which is Silicon valley speak for "we're making it up as we go along" (see also HTML5). It can change at any time.

2. The membership of the Steering Committee can change over time (and they can also change the CoC). What if in 5-10 years time I have built a successful business on this software, and the SC is taken over by employees of a rival company that then denies me use of it. As far as I can tell, I am shafted with no recourse.

For this reason I would never use any software licensed like this to do anything serious, nor would I contribute to any software licensed like this.

> The creators created the software, they can put any conditions they please on how others might use it.

Indeed so, they have that right.

I personally wouldn't consider using code licensed like this, because even if I 100% agreed with the CoC and Steering Committee, both might change over time (the CoC says "We expect the Code of Conduct to be a living document") and I have no idea who'll be on the Steering Committee in 5-10 years time, and whoever it is will be able to pull the rug from under my feet at a whim.

> They bound their open-source license to a Code of Conduct

This isn't open source software, because the Steering Committee can arbitrarily take away anyone's right to use the software any time they like.