ctulek

If the government backs your inhuman activities, you practically have all these institutions at your disposal.

My only concern with DRM in browser is that, as far as I understand the technology, any website can put a small piece of arbitrary DRM content and your browser will send information to that website uniq to your device, and your device will be tracked by DRM providers and probably also by that website.

Firefox gives you the option to disable DRM in the settings. Chrome also has it but it is buried deeply in advanced settings. Safari does not seem to have it at all.

We use our local library for watching DVDs, they have a great collection of both new and old releases and it is free.

It is good to witness so much improvement in VR tech but most people focus on the eye. I think the killer step in VR and also AG will be when we can use all our fingers. Once we have that it will be a huge improvement in contrast to 2D interfaces. Haptic feedback on top of that would make the experience even better. Till that happens, VR experience is merely an eye interacting in a new world with 2 bulky pointers.

It would be great if someone develops a bracelet that can detect the electric signals going from my brain to my fingers and use it as an input to control virtual fingers.

(1) For the sake of extending the same analogy, the question is not whether people should have vacations and cars or not, it is about everybody asking for luxury vacations or cars.

(2) IMHO, housing may for sure move some people closer to their work but it also means more service workers and other jobs to move to the same spot; this sounds to me like a vicious circle. At the end isn't it this vicious circle that drives city growth? Even if the commute problem is solved, which I doubt looking all the cities I lived or know a little bit, how are we going to prevent the classic environmental challenges: clean water, or effects on natural habitat?

I have 2 questions:

(1) Do not such articles sound like "not everyone can afford a holiday in Hawai"? Or "all my friends have a Mercedes AMG but I don't"? What is the difference? *

(2) In Bay Area, the daily commute itself is an obvious sign of overpopulation. How does more housing not make it even worse?

* I exclude the gentrification problem which is really affecting the lives of poor and old people as their mobility is far worse than middle class, and most of the time they won't be able to buy the new houses and apartments anyway.

This complaint looks to me about some devs jumping to use the alpha version of v2 and got confused about which version the homepage points to. This is separate and a minor problem which they have fixed anyways.

It is hard to find well maintained JS libraries in these days. Thanks a lot for the mature work done here, especially in terms of documentation. So many OS projects launch their new shiny versions in such a rush, they leave their users in darkness for a very long time.

The story is very important and thanks to NY Times for covering it. However, calling it "Turkish" history is a few thousand years short.

This looks like a poorly written sponsored article.

More housing will boom real estate market, and only for short term. I don't believe new housing will help average Joe to have better prices. To the contrary, it will make some real estate investors richer.

That is the core of this discussion I believe. Bay Area is really hot as a place to live and many real estate investors are very much aware of that. I can assure you that most of the new housing put there just becomes a big target for the investors. I believe most of new housing won't be available to low income families but immediately go to the real estate hunters. Right now, there is a huge global market hungry to invest to Bay Area.

In that respect, I support the housing is limited, instead we should push more public transportation, we should push more on new hot zones for commercial zones, outside of the current ones. This is the best way to balance housing and traffic.

I like 1Password. They were expensive and required separate licenses for desktop and mobile when I bought. I don't know the current pricing model.

They have a good product, nice blog articles explaining various technical decisions they made, and a fast customer support in terms of listening feedback.

I am not sure if it is getting complicated in terms of libraries and frameworks. We had prototype vs jquery wars, or gwt, dojo or yui discussions.

I bet the problem is Github! I mean, we are the victim of their success in solving one of our bottlenecks: collaboration. Now it is not only easier to start a project but equally easier to get followers, adapters, and contributors.

CSV for sure requires a convention to be shared between the producer and the consumer of the data. Once you have that I don't think you will need to deal with this problem.

To be honest, what I didn't like is the tone of the article. It is just that this statement is wrong: "But the problem is that CSV isn't really a well defined file format with a well defined syntax." There is RFC 4180.

If you are using a proper CSV library you don't have any of the problems this format is trying to solve. The CSV format does not have any issues mentioned, it is either a buggy CSV library or some lazzy developer who thinks CSV is just fields separated with comma writing 2 line of code instead of using a proper CSV library.

I agree with the introduction part of the article. However, pro gun guys should also stop this "my right to own a gun is in constitution" BS. Once this is also done, it just boils down to a certain group of people having a specific need to be fulfilled.

The problem is that we all have different needs that we want to fulfill but we limit ourselves for various political, sociological, and environmental reasons.

In my neighbourhood, a gun shop is robbed, and hundreds of guns are now in black market. I not only see all these mass shooting news but also lots of irresponsible gun owners killing/hurting themselves or family or friend.

If we have introduced a new gadget today, with so much security and safety issues, I guess it would be ridiculed in days if not hours. It is clear to me that guns are in the same category and I don't care if the author of this article or any other person uses them carefully. It is just that many people don't.

I didn't discuss whether the cause is noble or not. I discussed whether what Peter Thiel is doing noble or not. I don't find his action noble. In other words, that someone supports a noble cause does not make them noble, one should also check their intentions.

If Thiel didn't have a history with Gawker, I would believe to this nobel cause. However, it is obvious that he is using his power for personal revenge.

The short article just tries to show that the new billionaires are not different than old billionaires. They won't hesitate to use their power for personal gain in any area.

Well, you may say, of course, they will use their power for their personal gain. Well, yes, that is the point. Silicon Valley billionaires are not different.

Sure. It is a fallacy that one can provide me an objective definition of Christianity or any religion in that regard.

It will be indeed as "objective" as what medicine/biology defines someone "healthy". That being said, we already define certain categories when it comes to disabilities, and with very few disputes. Moral values could also be like that, and indeed its like that for who are legally called psychopaths and such.

Anyway, I think the author of the article linked in the root comment is looking for something more divine for moral values, but as a disappointment, just repeats the same rituals of thousand year old fallacies like as if theist believes have objective basis from which other objective basis can be inferred.

If we agree that most of the wars and immoral things are done in the name of god, I think being theist or not is irrelevant to posses moral values.

I don't think it is in princible impossible to find objective moral values hardwired in our brains that makes us uncomfortable when we do things that is not good for ourselves, or our families, or society.

Last few centuries helped us to trash so many believes that were basically wrong (and amazingly it was even trashing itself every decade now thanks to scientific methods), I don't see any reason that is also not possible for morality, which My gut feeling says is probably a mental optical illusion like thinking the world is flat.

The core problem of utopias is that they take one dimension of human character and push it to its extreme. We are both competitive and cooperative beside many other things. On top of that, the same person can become/look as if more competitive or more cooperative in different groups. That is, even in a group of heavily cooperative people the one with more competitive tendencies will be described as competitive. This may even results this guy being expelled from the group.

Many novels and movies use this to build their story. In a "bad" world a guy saves everybody or in a "good" world things go wrong because one of them starts doing "bad" things.

The modern approaches we take give more emphasis to the differences of people in both work environment and society.

I don't think they are trying to answer your big question. On one hand, as mentioned in previous replies, even a human cannot just understand what you are talking about and would ask further questions, on the other hand, it is not about to try to answer all questions but to find some interesting, frequent cases that products like Viv can solve for you.

Maybe we should mostly think about AI products/tools as just another (weird) friend who is good at answering certain questions for us. At the end, we don't even expect any of our friends to be able to answer all of our questions. Indeed, we pick the right friend for right question.

Sidenote: we should call it ad-company blockers, not ad blockers

+1

This negative press followed by positive press happened to Tesla so many times, I can't help but think that it is just some guys found a way to make a couple extra bucks.

first world problems

The main reason could be that they don't have a competitor in UNIX devices at the moment, at least when it comes to hardware quality.

Beside that, if you want to do mobile development, you need a OS X at hand, again, not much alternatives.

All companies have a life time at the end, and I think Apple is enjoying its 90s of Microsoft era.

I don't think an engineer being able to take sabbatical or paid well is something to label engineers as spoiled. As long as work ethic is there, this is actually what an employee in any profession should get.

That people are paid here well is a result of the huge imbalance of wealth in the world is another discussion topic.

+1

Regulations on hardware devices do not stop innovation in hardware. One can say there are far few hardware startups than software startups, but I don't think regulations are the main reasons of this difference.

Well, in Turkey, Turkish Delight is not as popular as people may think. Probably, tourists eat more Turkish Delight than Turkish people... I eat more of this sweet here in US then back in Turkey. Looks like another article that just enjoys stereotyping.