chestervonwinch

Perhaps what leads to small world networks?

> A small-world network is a type of mathematical graph in which most nodes are not neighbors of one another, but the neighbors of any given node are likely to be neighbors of each other and most nodes can be reached from every other node by a small number of hops or steps.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small-world_network

The patent: https://patents.google.com/patent/US6990453

> Music theory is a descriptive enterprise, which aims to make sense of music as composed/performed/enacted by humans.

That seems a rather rigid stance. Those same composers may have studied theory, incorporated its elements, and invented new variations that gained adoption which then become theory, right? It feels a bit like language in that sense.

I'm upset they lost all their photo and music data. Going back to old pages feels like visiting an abandoned mall.

I would love what you describe. Producers would have to design and manufacture like this from the outset (like you said) but also open source their CAD files.

There's already a market for these things. But the prices are often crazy high because the supply is limited to the parts that people are able to get from scrapped vehicles. For example, see this $200 plastic radio bezel for a 1995 Toyota: https://www.ebay.com/itm/264805497008

I believe you could have made your point without the "fossil" insults.

I think the parent comment meant doing very little from an evolutionary perspective.

I use seek by inaturalist for plant identification [0]. It claims to support fungi identification also, but I have not used it for that personally. It's a very popular app, so perhaps someone else will offer their direct experience using it with fungi.

[0]: https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/seek_app

> The other perverse incentive is that you will end up with engineers trying to extract as much value from other engineers as possible, because it becomes part of leveling up: how much you make other people deliver. Even as an IC.

Raising up and increasing the productivity of your peers sounds like a good thing. I think I'm missing how this is a bad outcome due to a perverse incentive. Are you saying the value extracted from peers is not real value or that the focus on your raising your peers detracts from more important business goals?

dear lord, I couldn't do loom. I got stuck too long and too often.

I think there's some truth to that. On the other hand, it does allow you to connect with people that you would've likely never incidentally crossed paths IRL to express romantic interest in the first place.

I think the spirit of it is somewhere between "you know what you are doing" and "you can envision what you are likely doing". The latter isn't quite as catchy though.

> And neovim is heavily embracing the LSP paradigm, where you'd use something like gd to jump to definition when on top of a function and a language specific LSP server will tell Neovim where to jump to.

This x100. I switched to neovim+pylsp a few months ago, and it's been an absolute delight. I use lspconfig [1] and pyslp [2] since most of my time is spent developing Python code. Not only can I navigate more quickly and easily, I also find myself catching more silly errors before run-time due to better linting from the lsp.

It used to be that I wouldn't use vim beyond quick edits on single files. Although I still prefer to use vim style bindings in IDEs, I can go much further before I feel the need to fire up an IDE in the first place.

[1]: https://github.com/neovim/nvim-lspconfig

[2]: https://github.com/python-lsp/python-lsp-server

Agreed! But it's a frustrating experience when you find when a website or application doesn't implement Esc for what you find to be nearly standard behavior across other applications. E.g., it seems like 80% of lightboxes allow closing via Esc.

> Reddit is one of the last places with huge amounts of publicly accessible online discussions.

There are still some pretty active enthusiast message boards, e.g., https://www.tacomaworld.com

But your overall point is valid, I think. My pointing to a single active forum doesn't change the fact that many of other enthusiast groups have moved to facebook groups and the like.

I use zoom in the browser, and this my experience every time:

1. On first opening the link, a browser confirmation window immediately asks me for permission to launch the app. I press "Cancel".

2. There is no option to join from my browser. But, there is a big blue button that says "Launch Meeting". I press it.

3. Again, the confirmation window from (1.) is raised. I press "Cancel".

4. Choosing to cancel a second time causes a visibility toggle for a small link on the bottom of the page (hidden beneath the giant blue button) that says, "Having issues with Zoom Client? Join from Your Browser".

Anti-patterns out the wazoo!

Presently, for sure. I was wondering in the hypothetical, too, though. Authors really just need to provably show that they have a strong influence/presence on the publication graph or something. Although, reducing a researcher's entire value to a single scalar index is probably fraught. Also, egos would never go for completely anonymous authorship system, I think.

There's likely multiple forces, but at least one must be money. Someone's gotta host the data, right? That falls on either the universities or the publishers.

It follows from your comment that we should have anonymous authors in addition to anonymous reviewers. Can a researcher establish a provable track record of doing quality work while remaining anonymous?

It's important to maintain a sense of self awareness about it though, i.e., recognizing you want/need to focus more well-defined task where the outcome yields a sense of achievement because you need a break from some larger/fuzzier goal.

I've seen them while cruising S Pleasant Valley, but there are a number of road sections where they're posted: http://austintexas.gov/page/high-injury-roadways

Here in Austin Texas, we have lovely signs to remind you of your imminent crash!

http://austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Sign%201.JP...

> After a binarization to make the edge stand out ...

Edge binarization is dependent upon edge detection algorithm choice, threshold algorithm choice, and both of their respective parameters. It's often very difficult to find a set of parameters that aren't brittle due to occlusions, poor contrast, camera noise, etc.

Hough works great if you can do this part confidently. But in my experience, robust edge binarization for Hough is often not very feasible in the wild.

> This is loosely the same idea that drives React, ObservableHQ, Kafka, and other event-streaming architectures, but I first encountered this ~15 years ago at a bank.

See also the "observer pattern" [0]. It's a fun exercise to implement a reactive system in Python using the descriptor protocol [1]. IPython's traitlets library is an example of this in the wild [2].

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_pattern

[1]: https://docs.python.org/3/howto/descriptor.html

[2]: https://github.com/ipython/traitlets

That they decided to call a DAG tool "AWS step functions" always puzzled me. I get it now -- like "step by step" -- but didn't a single person do a web search for "step function" beforehand to find it already has a totally separate meaning in mathematics and scientific applications?

I realize naming things is hard, but they confuse me. Are these due to historical quirks, or am I missing something?

E.g., why is it called a terminal emulator and not a terminal user interface? Why is there a "y" in pty if it stands for pseudo terminal? Why is it call it a "pseudo terminal" if it's acting like a communication pipe?

Whoever made this is incredibly talented. What a tragedy for anyone to have gone through this.

Get outta here with that slippery slope silliness