In Telegram the first is available opt-in, an equivalent to the second is available opt-in (key change = shows up as a different chat), and the third is equally true.
On re-reading my previous comment, it was pretty insulting, which I think provoked you to retaliate. I apologize for my tone.
Modifying your example’s verb, if you said “Where is the new house?”, then I’d say you’re implying the new house presently exists - unless we’re currently poring over housing development plans, in which case I’d say you’re clearly referring only to plans. Maybe the reason we’re reading the headline differently is context. This is the first I’ve heard of new Spanish trains, so I took the words out of context (until after clicking and reading), but if you were already aware of this planning-stage project then I can see how the headline would conjure train plans, not presently existing trains, for you.
Re 2-3 years, the alternative is that the delay includes some repeated work, some time where work is done inefficiently or even on hold due to confused requirements, some things with lead time that got reset, and the overhead of correcting the mistake. Still a costly screwup, of course.
Imagine there’s an FBI raid on, or congressional investigation into, whatever American news outlet attacks your political beliefs, and I think you’ll find yourself believing not that the government must be scared of the truth, but that these guys didn’t deserve their tongues.
It’s easy to stand outside a regime’s borders and say it can’t change your reality, and comforting to believe that the truth always comes out in the end, but I think reality is more harsh: “History is written by the winners.”
In correcting a triviality, you’ve been more dishonest than GP and even the headline. GP inflated the confidence of the three year limit. You said that the headline is “exactly right”, while in fact it’s objectively false, the “new trains” it refers to do not exist. You’ve also fabricated 2-3 years of repeated work, which is not backed by this source, would be pretty bizarre if truly nothing could be salvaged, and in fact is apparently contradicted by other sources, which state that the firm worked with bad measurements for only about a year.
I have trouble believing that you were always able to get to the bottom of it and determine it to be one of these causes, not only because it entails a remarkable ability to connect with many otherwise unresponsive posters, and the because it’s so easy for a person to read a challenging story and just assume that missing pieces would make it fit a prior conviction, but because it’d be pretty remarkable if I’m really the end of your ten-year streak. Hi. PayPal stole from me and I fit none of those points. I had a personal account, a friend made a habit of repaying me via PayPal despite my already knowing better, PayPal allowed it for a while then switched to accepting transfers to my account but barring withdrawals or return transfers, in effect taking out a non-consensual unannounced month-long loan from me. You can tell me how PayPal may have become confused and incorrectly believed I’m taking pre-orders, breaking their TOS, money laundering, etc, but those beliefs are factually incorrect, my usage was not inappropriate, and it’s very different to say “PayPal only does it when X” and “PayPal only does it when they believe X, which they frequently do mistakenly”.
Yes, firewalls often prevent this from happening, waiting to read about some new setting on HN does not. Firewalls also aren’t going to block legitimate traffic unless they’re badly configured.
What a shame it’d be if we’d put cigarette company jobs first. For their victims, of course, but also for jobs. Think of all those smart, talented, gainfully employed people out there. What a shame it’d be if we’d instead fought to keep them somewhere both their talent and their lives are wasted.
Secret keys are backed up in order to recover the data in the event of device loss, and master passwords are used to prevent data access by an attacker with disk access, including access to device backups in the cloud. Am I misunderstanding, or are you just accepting that the data gets lost or breached in those situations?
Could just be dysfunction, but Musk’s behavior makes it look more likely it’s an intentional lie: his only comments have been “Works for me” in the midst of it [1], and “Significant backend server architecture changes rolled out. Twitter should feel faster.” just after [2].
I quit Affinity Photo for Pixelmator Pro a while back because Affinity Photo is quite a bit slower, and because it mostly just copies Photoshop’s UI, while Pixelmator Pro rethinks and improves the bad parts of Photoshop’s UI while copying the good. In the past Pixelmator (before the Pro) was lacking features, but Pro largely addressed that, and they continue to ship significant improvements regularly. Affinity Photo recently came out with a 2.0 across their suite which may have addressed the pain points, and I’d like to try.
I think the coolest TLDs are .edu, .org, .gov, and .com, in that order, because that’s ordered by likelihood the content (not design) will be good, knowing nothing else about the website.
GitHub’s reputation for reliability really did a 180 after the Microsoft acquisition, as some predicted. It’s strange to me that despite this, you still get vociferous argument every step of the way to blaming Microsoft. People don’t remember GitHub’s past reputation for excellent reliability, then they accuse you of rose tinted glasses, then they say we’re just noticing it more now, then they say GitHub’s complexity significantly changed at a time that just happened to coincide with the acquisition, then they say better reliability is impossible. No, man, Microsoft acquired it, and when they got around to transitioning it to their infra, reliability plummeted.
22/7 has you memorize four digits (including the position of the /) to get pi to four digits (including the position of the .), 355/113 has you memorize seven digits to get pi to eight digits, 355/113-1/3748629 has you memorize 17 digits to get pi to 16 digits. I don’t get it. How is it easier than just memorizing pi? How is it surprising to get out about as many bits as you put in?
You’re doing the caricature attack thing. It’s a safe bet Kahneman is aware both that people sometimes change their minds on everything and that we often change their minds on small things.
It results in your browsing history being tracked and sometimes sold by your access point and ISP at a page level instead of just domain level, results in injected ads and banners on some access points, results in injected trackers on Verizon, and more broadly it permits unknown third parties to alter the content of your website.
That doesn’t match with Carlsen’s past behavior (he’s been consistently graceful in defeat over many years), isn’t what Carlsen did (he refused to play again, he didn’t even directly accuse him of cheating let alone call for his expulsion or harass him), and there isn’t no evidence (just weak evidence).
Just consider, for a moment, the possibility that the kid did cheat again. What could Carlsen have possibly done that you wouldn’t call a tantrum? What he did was the most polite, least confrontational, thing possible.
We don’t currently have sufficient evidence that he cheated, but don’t confuse uncertainty for evidence towards either side.
Let’s not frame this as trust them vs don’t, it’s trust them vs trust your ISP. On one hand, you have a company that seems to be doing as much as possible to commit to privacy, and on the other, a company that straight up tells you they’re monitoring you and sending the data all over the place. Does that scale really tilt differently if you point out there’s a non-zero chance the first company is secretly just as bad as the second?
I’m not trying to argue in bad faith. I think it’s my idea that’s offensive to you, but I’m open to criticism if you think there’s something else.
> But I’m not going to do it from the basis that it’s equivalent to governmental action at the barrel of the gun.
Genuinely, why do you believe it isn’t? I understand that the threat of violence carries its own separate offense, but in terms of ability to suppress ideas, it is equivalent. At an individual level it’s a choice, but at a systems level it’s enforced as surely as at the barrel of a gun, by modulating influence according to conformance.
I’m not defending China, and more broadly I don’t think criticism of the USG is tacit support for China. Whatever happened to principles leading the good guys, instead of the other way around? And true, in China I wouldn’t have the freedom to express these ideas - maybe if they were smarter, they’d find a way to let me feel that freedom while still firmly controlling whether those ideas can spread and shape society.
On the contrary, censorship is effective even if it only makes something less common. No censorship is absolute: Chinese people absolutely know homosexuality exists, what its censorship accomplishes is keeping it the province of the “weirdos”. Towards the same end, the USG regularly uses financial incentives to make one side of an issue 100x more prevalent than the other. It’s actually a more insidious form of censorship, because there’s less legal oversight, most people don’t know that it’s happening, and it’s hard to call out any particular instance of it.
The context here is that every time one politician’s or party’s email goes to spam more often than the other’s, they whip everybody into an anti-Google frenzy about “political manipulation”.
Google, as usual, is insightful in their response: by acting quickly and aggressively to separate users into classes, they minimize the number of users who benefit from one class’s wins, and turn users against each other to disrupt the formation of any unified movement that questions Google’s unilateral control of email.
To be clear, this isn’t the “I can do what I want” kind of freedom, this is the “my country can do what it wants” kind of freedom, right? Because if we’re talking about personal freedom, then can you help me understand how they square it with an admitted dictatorship and a (reputation for a) culture of “don’t make trouble, just endure it”?
Well yes, if the US were one of those parties then it wouldn’t be a “proxy” war. Assisting one side without being directly involved is the definition of a proxy war. Proxy wars aren’t necessarily aggressive or wrong, either.
The way I see it, websites like that are saying they’ll only do it without a condom. You want it real bad, so it’s tempting to try to bargain about it, or maybe just take it off for now - it’s just a little while, what’re the chances it goes wrong? - but we all know that the smart move is to keep it on or back out entirely. Reasonable partners, of which there are many, understand and cooperate. And ones that don’t aren’t the type of partner you want anyway.
Yeah, lots. Not most people, though. You seem like a pretty typical NPD case: all your reasons are about you, casual manipulation including in the way you’re treating people in the comments, little empathy, and increased desire for attention, be it upvotes or the outrage you’re trying to elicit by posting this.
Places like Reddit and Facebook are filled with this. What generally happens is the individual succeeds, but the community becomes boring, because people who can’t support each other never achieve much.
I wish you luck in finding your way to bigger and better things.