extempore

Is there still no visual indicator that the wearer is in transparency mode? I am frequently in situations where I'm out in public and something warrants saying, where one or both of us are wearing airpods. Transparency mode would be worth so much more if other people were able to see that I can hear them, and vice versa. There have been so many improvements to apple devices which are obvious to anyone with an eye for what's missing but for which we've had to wait 5-10 years before they materialize, if ever. I am resigned to this being something I can look forward to in 2030.

He wasn’t being sarcastic.

None of those things is murder, which is unlawful killing, usually premeditated. Maybe there is a society which doesn’t hold murder to be wrong, but I’ve never heard of it, and it’s hard to see how it could last.

FYI there’s a search mode called verbatim, and it’s not the same as putting the individual words in quotes. It’s hidden under the search tools menu. In my experience the results it provides always contain the search terms.

Patch Me If You Can

Whenever you're called on to make up your mind, and you're hampered by not having any, the best way to solve the dilemma, you'll find, is simply by spinning a penny.

No - not so that chance shall decide the affair, while you're passively standing there moping; but the moment the penny is up in the air, you suddenly know what you're hoping.

- Piet Hein

That seems decidedly unsafe to say, but even if you’re right, the second paragraph doesn’t follow from the first. “Everyone generalizes from one example! At least, I do.”

You are reading a great deal into an innocuous comment.

Did you read the memo as it was written, replete with links to supporting research? Or did you only read the maliciously leaked version which had stripped out all the links?

Stereotype threat is a product of publication bias. It doesn’t replicate. https://replicationindex.com/2017/04/07/hidden-figures-repli...

The phrase “black art” in the paper refers to a technical challenge which only experts can tame, via methods which aren’t widely known. It has zero to do with ‘black arts” in the sense of witchcraft. The blog post drifts between these meanings, possibly with poetic intention.

See also the video game with the unbeatable giant in Ender’s Game.

It says that, but it’s wrong. California has no statute of limitations on murder. This was recently demonstrated in dramatic fashion when the golden state killer was arrested for murders committed 30 years prior.

It’s interesting how smoothly this logic can move between “your country”, “your religion”, “your ethnicity”, “your ideology”. I am not making a case for or against any of these. But if pragmatic arguments for group punishment hold currency when there is known collateral damage, arguments from principle lose currency in equal measure.

I have a feeling you mean that they ignore known unknowns. Everyone ignores unknown knowns, because they are unknown.

Consider that you were far more likely downvoted because you show no awareness that increasingly onerous penalties are ineffective deterrents when people don’t expect to get caught. If pickpockets can work the crowds at a pickpocket hanging, people will keep using their phones. Passing “tough on texting” legislation makes people feel like heroes but it is no panacea for the problem. And much of the danger in utilizing phones exists even when it is completely hands-free, which is unlikely to be banned even in the most restrictive case.

Needlessly obnoxious retort, as gp is exactly right. There is no a priori reason to zero in on road design as a major contributory factor given the huge range of possibilities. One can easily apply profound selection bias in a complex problem simply by choosing which experts to ask.

That’s Brook’s law: “Adding manpower to a late software project makes it later,”

That’s Hofstadter’s law: “It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law.”

Nor with a certain super cool language of the future https://github.com/unisonweb/unison

This was very upsetting when it happened. The same version of unison was incompatible with itself if they had been built with different but consecutively released versions of the ocaml compiler. I feel like using compiler versions like 4.01 and 4.02 is irresponsible when it's documented that they produce binary incompatible products, but that is how it was. https://marc.info/?l=unison-users&m=142286809310149

Of course they do. Not sure why it’s something to brag about or not to brag about though, it’s an implementation detail. Scala for instance uses custom classes for each size set up to a certain threshold.

Intentional programming is not tied to graphical representation even if that’s how it looked in a prototype. It’s more about separating program structure from detail, trying to better deliver on Dijkstra’s comment about a semantic layer at which one can be absolutely precise. I consider it required reading for anyone frustrated by the present state of programming.

I highly recommend ice cold showers to anyone looking to explore this direction. They’re easily available, don’t take very long, and produce immediate benefits.

Since apparently nobody else wants to tell you: your very high levels of passive-aggressiveness and silent grudge nurturing lead me to estimate it around 70% likely that you are the problem. How do you think he would describe you, if given the opportunity to respond? You should think about it.

A couple years ago I worked out how to use these simultaneously. I always meant to publish this but I've sat on it all that time. Here you go:

https://gist.github.com/paulp/91d657489b617dbb7de6db8b7c4fe4...

If you think you were frustrated before, just wait: you get to issue about three searches before you have to solve captchas to see the results. Google thinks only bots want to use those features simultaneously.

It is not a criticism as much as it is a fact, no less true than ever. The JVM is designed to run Java. Other languages also compile to Java bytecode, and Sun and Oracle have made some helpful changes.

But the VM is OVERWHELMINGLY designed around the requirements of Java and to be performant for Java. Try compiling a non-OO language to fast bytecode without spending a lot of time considering what the analogous Java code would compile to.

Java bytecode is so close to Java, you can decompile it almost directly to readable Java source. Try that with JRuby or Clojure or Scala and see how close you land.

Refusing to negotiate with terrorists isn’t a strategy designed to produce the best outcome in isolation. It’s to avoid providing incentives for more terrorism, despite the consequences viewed in isolation.

So “outcomes are worse if you don’t” is not relevant. Several times as many terrorism incidents with better outcomes on average is not what most people would consider effective anti-terrorism.

"If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you're the asshole."

On a site like this most replies will take you at face value and try to comfort you. Alternative take: you are the common factor in all these supposed betrayals. If we asked the others, do you think we'd get different perspectives on what happened?

I missed a couple which didn't mention go:

- Rob Pike is like Henry Ford, except when people said “faster horses” he said “that is the best idea I’ve ever heard.”

- Rob Pike is the Antonin Scalia of programming language design - an Originalist. Except 1970s not 1770s.