crvdgc

Too bad you can write only one of those positions on your resume.

> Whether you’re rich or poor, Facebook costs the same and the experience and features you have access to are identical.

Or you can say, the amount of work that's extracted from the user is the same. Because the major "service" of social media isn't the webapp that has a feed timeline, or a fancy UI, or availability (which can be easily copied by competitors). It's the network effect that comes from user's participation. It's very possible there's a net profit for the majority of users (either from clicking the ads, or from simply using the social media), so the "subsidized" users' loss is not a primary concern here.

Here it means "extinct in the wild", see the link from the post https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/extinctio...

Some devices have physical kill switches for cameras and mics. Whether or not the eavesdropping theory is true, such devices can help you deal with your immediate worries.

It comes down to semantics of “kill”. I wonder if there's anyone can believe long work hours are the sole cause of mortality, regardless of whether they read the title.

The usual interpretation, long work hours are the major factor in the mortality of 745k people, is a valid interpretation of the research results.

To say it only contributes to mortality along with many other factors, without pointing out the portion of correlation, is to say nothing at all, which isn't what the report tries to communicate.

As a “non-native” English speaker, the single most influential class I took for learning English is lexicology. Each student is required to recite 500 Latin roots and 200 affixes. It's hard, but after that, the vocabulary capability grows exponentially.

Same for me.

To all native English speakers, before talking about standards and lingua franca, try to implement some basic algorithms in Latino and take a minute to imagine a world where it is the standard (programming & documentation). Then you'll understand the meaning of "entry barrier" and "language advantage", if you remember that's the reality for billions of people in the world including me.

Well, at least when writing that lsp, you have this lsp to help.

> WARNING: Please be careful when using it! It could be dangerous. In particular, writing "rm" or "dd" into it could be like running around with a chainsaw. But you'd be careful writing "rm" anywhere in Linux anyway, no?

Side effects always seems like potential disasters for me.

The author linked to a wikipedia page[0] for examples of viable business models, and it interestingly includes "Professional Open-source Model" without explanation.

[0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_model#Examples

Working for a company and working for visibility only differ in the capital gain (in the broad sense of the word). Your goal is still external to yourself and towards the need of the capitalist system.

An analogy would be, if you want to write an article, you can write a soft sell (work for a company), an article of a popular topic (work for visibility), or something you think is valuable (work for interest). Which will you choose?

Sometimes, the latter two coincide, but more often than not, they don't. The result of working for visibility depends more on your marketing skill rather than your technical skill. (What would be the most popular framework in two years?) And the value you create will fluctuate as the fashion changes.

Changing from working for a company to working for visibility is definitely an improvement, but I'm skeptical of its effect on ameliorating capitalist problems the author talked about in the beginning.

I'm quite surprised intuitionism is not brought into this conversation.

> Intuitionism is a philosophy of mathematics that was introduced by the Dutch mathematician L.E.J. Brouwer (1881–1966). Intuitionism is based on the idea that mathematics is a creation of the mind. The truth of a mathematical statement can only be conceived via a mental construction that proves it to be true, and the communication between mathematicians only serves as a means to create the same mental process in different minds. [^0]

The intuitionistic logic, through Curry-Howard-Lambek correspondence, serves an important role in proof theory and model theory.

[0]: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/intuitionism/

> as no-one can afford everyone else's patent licensing fees

A patent deadlock.

I had the same experience as well. I tried NixOS once as my main desktop environment. I encountered two problems that made me switch to Ubuntu+Nix. And they work perfectly for their own purposes.

One problem is dynamically linked binaries, where the library points to a global position (like /usr/lib). In NixOS, different builds can depend on different versions of the same binary, so there is no single global location. This is not necessarily a bad thing in itself. And normal cases can be fixed with the patchelf [^1] utility. I couldn't make it work with a Z3 binary, so I finally gave up.

The other problem is when I tried to configure jackdbus. There's only one example [^2] configuration. It is marked as outdated by the wiki, and indeed none of the settings work for me.

Then I realized these two are not problems that Nix tries to solve. Pointing to a global binary is okay for some quick fixes. And JACK module is better to work out-of-the-box, I don't want to dive into all of the configurations before I haven't even used it.

Now I use Ubuntu for casual desktop applications and write Nix derivations for projects that need reproducibility. And I think I find my perfect balance.

[^1]: https://github.com/NixOS/patchelf [^2]: https://nixos.wiki/wiki/JACK

From the Chinese poster, it says the price is 1XXX9 CNY (it's intentionally written this way to build up expectations), which ranges from $1530 to $3050.

The control buttons are designed to use shapes rather than symbols to be more including, e.g. involving workers into the decision making process.

I tried half of a “Head First” which claims to addressing this problem with cognitive science methods (eccentric pictures, repetition, handwriting, and dialogue style). At first it feels good, but after half of the book, I realized all of these can be done in my head even when reading non-head-first books.

An engaged reader will do more than just “reading”, but actively comparing the content with own experience, trying to prove or disprove the argument, and sometimes making up stories to help them to memorize the content.

So I would argue it's not books that aren't working, but a certain way of reading that's not working. Books with these techniques externalize part of the engaged reading process, but it may not be the optimal way for a specific person.

For the books that a person themselves can actively engaged in their own way, these techniques can be noisy and redundant.

For those they wouldn't have been actively engaged (like the leisure reading mentioned in the post), these techniques could be useful. But the person doesn't expect to get that much out of the books in the first place.

Haskell Language Server (https://github.com/haskell/haskell-language-server) offers a pretty good IDE experience.

It also mitigates the parameter naming problem. With a type hole, the language server will infer the type. But in the case of two parameters having the same type, you have to consult the definition or doc.

Sony DPT-RP1 user here. It's a similar large screen e-ink reader with writing support. It's of great help to me for PDF reading and taking notes. My opinion on reMarkable 2 (from the page):

Disadvantages: - can only transfer with WiFi - not A4 sized (I find this important for most of books and papers)

Advantages: + epub support (DPT only works with PDF) + customization (DPT software is completely uncustomizable, but good enough for most daily use, e.g. the screen can be synced to the computer screen for remote meetings) + OCR + cheaper (the A4 version of DPT is $600)

> More importantly, I would like to make the game recognise when there’s a forced guess _coming_ — currently if there’s a 50/50 chance in one corner of the grid that you’re clearly going to have to take eventually, you have to wait until that’s all there is. If you take the chance when there was a safe space available elsewhere, you’ll always lose.

Before you play, please note that this implementation changes everything.

In the conventional minesweeper, the best strategy is always take the guess first. Since any further play won't increase the chance of correct guess, and if you guess wrong, all the efforts are wasted. But here you are forced to complete all determined safe moves first.

I find myself losing again and again, and finally noticed this rule.

Mr. Robot vibe.