groups

I think the poster's point was that he spends a lot of money on apple products, relative to his income. To understand apple's success, one should look at how much money ordinary people with ordinary jobs spend disproportionate money on products they wouldn't otherwise.

There's a graph somewhere of yearly sales figures of various cars vs the cost of those cars. There's a general exponential decline from say the toyota camry, which costs reasonably and sells a lot, to a Bentley, which is the opposite. But there's an irregular data point with the BMW 3-series, because many, many people stretch to afford it. It sells disproportionately well for that reason.

I'm not assigning judgment on how anyone spends their money, just pointing out that there are human reasons for business success and failure.

It's not a chiclet keyboard. Looks like the keyboard for the thinkpad X220. in my experience it's a very good keyboard. of course I would pay a lot of money for a mechanically-keyed laptop.

Aristotle said that the rhetorician is a rhetorician not because he absolutely can convince someone of something, but because he is aware of all the means of persuasion.

likewise, there's no guarantee that a doctor can heal /you/. but you go to the doctor because he is aware of the various means of achieving health. this is different from evolutionary biology, where firm predictions can be relied on.

same goes for lawyers; they can't guarantee a victory, but they are aware of all the methods in the courtroom. These are professions and fields of study whose variables are humans. i agree with the parent commentor that the distinction is worth investigating.

yeah something is wrong. I ran the test on my lenovo x200s with an intel core 2 duo and intel GMA 4500 graphics and got 3700 "objects" and with a "tickcount" of 1400. I'm assuming objects are sprites--the test itself doesn't use the term.

If his HD4000 is getting 1250 objects, I shouldn't get 3700.

It's fine to edit for length and clarity if you recognize that by removing context you're creating a new context. It's up to the editor to be careful.

The editor can't say "I am the editor and I have perfectly preserved pg's comments" knowing that valleywag will call him a sexist, when the editor knows him not to be one. If the editor thinks pg is, they should talk. I'm convinced by pg's rebuttal.

this is a list of facebook's engineers' favorite hacks to make facebook work better, not a list hosted on facebook.com of various hacks.

with that said, I'm assuming you don't care about what facebook does with its website and app.

It bothers me.

But (just a guess) I hypothesize 4K comes from the film industry, while 720p and 1080[ip] come from TV and computer industries. So the two systems of measuring resolution were created independently and both have historical precedents, and the marketing mishap stems from blithely conflating the two. So I guess my explanation is: coincidence

183 DPI is "too small" for native viewing, but it'll make prettier pictures and more readable text.

Look up the Pentagon Papers and Woodward and Bernstein (and Rathergate, though that criticism was erroneous) for examples of established media sharply and consequentially criticizing the US government.

The media /are/ capable of it, and they /used/ to do it.

>Did anyone...

Over months I read many articles describing cool things you can do with emacs you can't do with vim, and eventually I switched.

So: one article, no. Many, yes.

This article illuminates specific instances where NSA mislead the public. The comments here saying stuff like "I don't believe anything any nefarious organization says"--your point is taken, but it's still important to analyze and respond to NSA continually.

The page gives no examples of pictures or memes and immediately asks for various permissions. I want to see what I'm getting myself into.

As a side note I hate that applications ask permission for my email address. Of course I used a dummy email address, but mememyfriends.com doesn't need an email address from me.

I write free software for selfish reasons--I want powerful software as Paul Graham defines it.

That powerful software amplifies thought is a side benefit. The more I (or groups) get together to think important thoughts, the more we can creatively destroy the parts of the system we don't like, and create systems we do.

I think there are real consequences of powerful software (more broadly, powerful computation); and I try to keep systemic consequences in mind as I write software.

Yes I think Emacs' philosophy is at odds with UNIX philosophy; I also think it's /superior to/ UNIX philosophy. It sounds like you take UNIX philosophy to be gospel, and deviation from that to be incorrect. I'm not trying now to convert you to Emacs' philosophy. Rather I think there are a lot of people who only know UNIX philosophy, when in fact there are alternatives.

I read this comment and got so mad that I looked at your previous comments and submissions. They seem high-quality.

I think I concede that I didn't get your joke. Oops. :)

If you're being serious, FLAME ON.

I genuinely don't understand what "'at best' 'rather' 'unexpected'" means.

I agree. In 2011 when I got my smartphone, I remember mobile websites being simpler than they are today. My phone isn't as zippy, not because of planned obsolescence, rather the internet has become more demanding in two years. It's like PCs in the 90s. People used to complain about their PCs being obsolete in six months. You don't hear that any more because PCs are fast enough.

I got my current iPhone (my first smartphone) in 2011. Before that I had an LG Envy Touch, with a phenomenal keyboard. I type fast on my iPhone, but I reckon I'm still 1.5 to 2x slower than with a physical phone keyboard. You can really hustle with a physical keyboard. All that said, if a keyboarded smartphone was fast and bug-free-enough I'd jump ship for the keyboard alone.

I haven't worked on one, but when I try the rMBPs at the store I find text more enjoyable to read. I have a retina iPhone, and I like reading text on it (though it's small). I value aspect ratio and total area of screen. A 3:2 15" retina screen would be perfect. If I could afford an 15" rMBP I'd get it (if only to run linux on).

My current laptop is a TN screen Thinkpad, and I loath the screen. I'm embarrassed to show it to other people. I haven't gotten a new laptop because 1. I'm on a shoestring right now, and 2. I want a better aspect ratio than 16:9, which is all Lenovo provides. Ugh. I hope the Chromebook Pixel inspires other manufacturers.

Edit: Actually, I should say I like the screen because the color temperature is so freaking awful that it doesn't bother me to work at night. My iPhone is shockingly blue compared to this dying-ass CCFL-backlit screen. I've never articulated this point before. I know I could change the color temperature manually, but there's something appealing about this being the stupid way it is.

If I would buy a new laptop, the most important specs would be an IPS screen and the best keyboard available because IPS screens cause me less eyestrain and a quality keyboard with a trackpoint is a pleasure. I value ergonomics. I also value a light laptop, as my desktop has ample power. I am a programmer.

I also value the capability to run any OS I want, because like brokenparser said, "because I am what I am and the supplied OS is never good enough."

>would they really dare to mock themselves in the honeypot?

Of course they would. The makers of a maximally-effective honeypot aren't going to shy away from making fun of TLAs. They'll do what's most effective.

With that said, I doubt it's a honeypot. Of course I don't plan to test that hypothesis.

I agree that who-owes-what is negotiated by the parties and not objectively pre-determined, and that we, as commenters, have a hand in deciding who-owes-what.

I ask you: would you want to secretly fail a secret grading criterion because something about you (tone, content (Church says it's content-based discrimination), et cetera) is not acceptable to a moderator?

Crucial points are: secret failing and secret grading. I wouldn't; I'd value the feedback, or get the heck out of there.

If he rigged the system the way you say, I'll be angry on your behalf. With that said, I'll nitpick:

Paul Graham can respond to your post however he wants. He _could_ simply say, "I don't care."

You _want_ an apology because you _think_ you've been wronged. A blog post entitled, "I want an apology from Paul Graham" sounds whiny--I get it. Still, from where I'm sitting the title, even with the "probably" proviso, sounds like a power-grab that denies Paul Graham's ability to give whatever response he wants to you. Also it looks linkbaity to me[1].

[1] I dislike linkbaity titles. I don't deny their effectiveness; I clicked the link!

disclaimer: I teach public speaking professionally, so these kinds of less-than-explicitly-conscious word choices stick out to me.

Edited to emphasize that I agree with the spirit of his post, and that I'm nitpicking because I enjoy picking nits.

As a casual browser this is the first I've heard of this. I don't know the accuracy of his claims.

I'm curious about his sources and their reasons for not coming forth. That he doesn't cite them by name leads to me to think they choose to be anonymous. I'm not accusing them of something.

I dislike the title. I need more information to decide for myself whether Paul Graham owes Michael O. Church an apology. I think Paul Graham has a hand, albeit limited, in deciding whether he owes Church an apology.

The article notes a slump in car sales, but doesn't chart historical bike sales (it only notes that in America bike sales are "solid") It could be coincidence: European bike might have risen, might have stayed the same.

>We decided to delve a little deeper into the figures and see which of these countries had the highest rates of bicycle-to-car ownership.

I'm more interested in historical bike sales, historical car sales, and the correlations and causations we could find, than which countries had the highest rates of bike-to-car ownership.