hetman

Yes. For their own citizens, not foreign actors who wish to influence said citizens.

For anyone that has had even moderate experience with TikTok comment moderation, it becomes clear very quickly there's an incredible bias that seemingly disfavours Western interests. This includes calls towards extreme violence that should be banned per their own content policy. I don't think you need to have access to any secret documents to have a good deal of suspicion this platform is being used by foreign actors either directly or indirectly to shape attitudes in the West. If freedom of speech is at stake, protecting TikTok may actually be harmful to that cause.

I wonder why there's no standalone app for PCs.

I have to say this is surprising. I have a cousin who co-founded what was once the largest email spam filtering company in Europe. He said that if he could get a do-over he'd just take a 9-to-5 and not deal with the stress and how much it had aged him. Of course this is just an anecdote and it's possible he was doing it wrong™, but it certainly fits the trend with others I have spoken to. For example, there's a feeling that the buck stops with you, it's difficult to establish boundaries for a healthy work life balance because there's no one else to pick up the slack. And if no one picks up the slack then you just get outcompeted by the businesses that do.

I wonder if there's a difference between various types of self employment where some are on net less stressful than others. In my cousin's case as a co-founder, there may still have been a lot of pressure from other team members, which is only marginally better than having a boss. Also, if there are effective strategies one can employ to limit issues that can have a negative impact in a self employed context, then further studies to elucidate such would be incredibly valuable.

So your car relies on the very things that may be unavailable in a major disaster scenario? I wonder if we're building insufficient redundancy into our civilisation always assuming all the modern niceties must always be there.

Not to mention the rather consistent crashing. I see it across multiple systems which makes me wonder if the developers even use it themselves.

Thunderbird seems to run everything in a single thread, something I only noticed when I tried to sync some large mailing list folders and the UI basically became unusable. I was really hoping to switch to it before this cropped up.

You're right in that only the libiio firmware relies on the CPU to forward the samples out to the ethernet interface. The UHD firmware on the other hand does not seem to occupy the CPU to do this, however I have still had trouble getting transfer speeds to go much faster than they do with libiio (and I've had a lot of other problems with UHD personally). I'm not certain what could cause this limitation though.

In theory the hardware probably could do what you're describing if someone wanted to hack the FPGA internals themselves. I'd love to hear if you ever have any success getting things running better.

They're great for all sort of exploratory and prototyping work on the cheap. There's a pretty active community as well developing all sorts of software tools to give you a leg up.

The AntSDR is a pretty solid piece of kit. It's compatible with the ADALM-PLUTO, so the available documentation is pretty great, and it's got both a compact and very solid construction (unlike a lot of the other offerings in the market).

The one thing to keep in mind (my experience is with the E200 though the E310 hardware architecture seems pretty similar from what I can see) is that the sampling rate is somewhat CPU bound by the onboard CPU. In spite of having a GigE interface, your sample rate will be limited to somewhere on the order of 110 MB/s which will give you a combined (Rx and Tx) sample rate of under 15 mega samples per second. I have heard of some people try to overclock these to boost the sample rate a bit. If that is all you need I could definitely recommend it though.

Oh good, Reddit seems to be leaking in again.

Your quotes seem to reinforce parent's assertion he's not talking about version control in the form of tooling but some kind of versioning in the code itself: "...while tests and versions..."

Conventions really don't bother me, I'm happy to adapt. Even case insensitivity, while not so common on Unix, can generally be dealt with. Underscore insensitivity though is kind of wild and breaks a lot of things (and a case insensitivity exception for the first character only, while tacitly admitting there really is a problem here, is just adding even more inconsistency).

The language has a lot going for it, however, its chosen scheme for identifier resolution undermines a lot of existing tooling people are used to using with other languages, which has kept a lot of people (including my self) away from seriously considering it.

Digital doesn't mean binary. A digital system must simply occupy a fixed number of levels, rather than the contiguous values of an analogue system. Binary systems, with 1 and 0, just happen to be one example of that.

There's plenty of non-binary schemes used in modern digital systems though. Modern NAND flash is one instance, for example QLC SSD drives store 16 distinct levels per storage cell (allowing each to encode the equivalent of 4-bits of data). Another example is 64-QAM, a modulation scheme used in a variety of places, including 802.11n Wi-Fi and Digital Terrestrial television (among others), which forms symbols out of two out of phase sinusoids, each of which can take up to 8 amplitude levels.

And even electronic computers haven't always been binary, one of the early Soviet computers was ternary, relying on 3 digits rather than the more familiar 2, to do all of its core computing functions.

Apparently this later became ISO 2047 and most of these characters are mapped into Unicode (with the exception of a few which have reasonable substitutes).

I was wishing for something like this recently so I'm genuinely pleased to know this exists.

While I hadn't considered the emphasis argument before, I think it actually makes a lot of sense. You're kind of front loading the mutation context in your consciousness.

That may or may not still be too simple a model. Cells are full of complex nano scale machinery and not only might it me plausible some of it is involved in the processes of cognition, I'm aware of at least one study which identified some nano scale structures directly involved in how memory works in neurones. Not to mention a lot of what's happening has a fairly analogue dimension.

I remember an interview with one neurologist who stated humanity has for centuries compared the functioning of the brain to the most complex technology devised yet. First it was compared to mechanical devices, then pipes and steam, then electrical circuits, then electronics and now finally computers. But he pointed out, the brain works like none of these things so we have to be aware of the limitations of our models.

By default Android is the same but it let's you turn it off. With the lock screen you can reduce feedback to only the password stars appearing and no key highlights. With password elsewhere you can remove the momentary password character preview. The keyboard lets you reduce key press feedback prominence so it's only a momentary flicker (and no character pop up), but there really should be an API to make the keyboard aware it's in "password mode" so you could eliminate feedback entirely.

Weirdly it works fine for me in Firefox but just stays loading forever in Chrome.

I don't think you need such extreme relativistic speeds to obtain the desired result though. The above assertion that every proton would have the energy of a baseball puts us at a rather incredible speed. A quick Google gives the energy of a baseball pitched at 90 mph to be around 117.4 J. For a proton to have the equivalent relativistic kinetic energy would put it at 99.999999999999999999999918% the speed of light!!

Now let's take a much more reasonable speed like 10% the speed of light. Assuming the 100 protons per cubic meter figure above, each square metre of ship now only needs to dissipate 2.27 mW of energy. 10% the speed of light is enough time to reach Alpha Centauri within a single lifetime (42 years). And fast enough to visit every part of the galaxy in less than a million years. We could even imagine generational ships travelling at 1% the speed of light (now the energy dissipation demands are 2.25 μW per square metre of ship surface). That's still under 10 million years to colonise the entire galaxy.

If intelligent life is abundant in the galaxy then I don't think the speed of spaceships at least offers a fundamentally insurmountable technical challenge for that life to spread everywhere.

The mistake here seems to be the somewhat naïve suggestion that the Soviet Union only took its path because the wrong people happened to find their way into leadership, rather than recognising that attempts at coërced ideological purity always seem to follow the same path historically no matter how well intentioned the ideology might have been.

I don't think he ever said "equally".

The cynic in me suggests this is true of both major parties in US politics. The sets of things they want to you learn and don't want you to learn -- usually because it's just too hard to have a public conversation due to ideological conflict -- those sets of things just happen to be different in either case.

It can be taught but most people have little motivation to learn. Genuine verification of claims is a lot of hard work so for most people the question becomes: Why bother learning how?

First, the warm and fuzzy feeling you get by confirming your chosen world view doesn't take very much work. Just a couple minutes on Google.

Second, for many, the mere suggestion that there is a need to learn a new skill connected with research will likely be interpreted as an attack on their intelligence.

So the real question we have to be asking is how we can motivate people to even want to uncover truth even when it leads to discomfort. The answer is obvious for those who have already arrived there but not for those who haven't.

I mean, only because it's possible to learn to live with doesn't make it pleasant. Especially for managing large projects it can get unwieldy. Most high level languages I can think of have moved away from this approach.

I used to be a huge Ruby fan but having exposure to Python where this isn't an issue, life is just easier.

Technically correct but not really clear of it helps clear communication in this context. SI natives think of a "kilometre" as its own thing (in the same way one thinks about a "mile") rather than thinking about it as a thousandfold multiple of a metre.

What's the utility of that? Self driving cars are meant to replace all humans, not just the safest ones.

I don't think someone doing video editing or 3D rendering is likely to agree with you here...

While I'm generally on board with this principle, I felt, given the nature of the conversation, this was a particularly egregious instance. Besides, sometimes new users can use a reminder. I'm generally not a fan of absolutist rules as they always tend to break down in some corner cases doing more harm than good (though of course we can disagree whether this was such a case). Either way, thank you for your reminder to my reminder :)