hobbes

Perhaps that's Google's intention. They are using your human intelligence to make educated guesses, rather than using AI. Your choices will be added to their dataset.

I agree with all this.

But, a major motivation to remaster old records is due to copyright expiring on the old recordings, particularly in Europe. A remastered release is considered a new release in terms of copyright, which can therefore be protected, I believe.

The depressing mountain of very cheap public domain John Coltrane (for just one example) "reissues" by every man and his dog was foreseen by the record companies.

And, while I'm here, these cheap reissues of expired copyright recordings often say they are "remastered" when all they've done is tweak the equaliser and added some phasing. For no other reason, these RVG remasters are great in order to identify the reference recording amongst the deluge of bedroom re-hashes.

(And, RIP Bobby Hutcherson. RVG's remasters of his recordings sparkle).

The only election to be held will be a Tory leadership election, not a general election.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/24/who-will-be-our-n...

The UK votes for constituency members of parliament, not a prime minister.

Someone was almost murdered. Of course it matters.

Give her the phone! GIVE HER THE PHONE!!

edit: OK, I'm being downvoted. That's fine. But, why put your irreplaceable life in mortal danger for the sake of keeping hold of replaceable consumer electronics? That's the disconnect I'm finding hard to process.

True. But for it to succeed and be widely adopted, it really needs an organization that is able to host it for the masses.

Email didn't evolve with Gmail. Only the UI evolved.

It could be suggested that Wave was a revolution rather than an evolution, and that was its greatest weakness. I'm sad that it's gone.

That's not a logo. It's Camelia, the spokesbug for Perl 6!

(Perl reaching out to pre-schoolers, it seems)

UPDATE: It appears that the logo was designed by Larry Wall. I now see its brilliance!

It appears that that article applies to situations where you need to make a choice.

When you accept the UI defaults, someone has chosen your meal or movie for you - no choice needs to be made.

Having a choice doesn't mean you need to make a choice. There's a thing called default settings that apply to those who want to be told what to do.

The choice you are making between different ways of dying has nothing do to with the point being made.

Well, none of this is communicated by your blog post. The "more" to your story is actually key to your story, it seems to me. Why did you not include it?

> Huge sections could have been skipped without affecting the plot or anything else.

The same could be said of Dostoyevsky. Those long, drawn out passages are often there to make a psychological impression upon the reader rather than adding anything to the plot line per se.

I applied for a job a few years ago, which had two interviews.

The first interview was to determine my technical ability and character.

The second interview was for them to gauge my reaction to all the crap parts of the job. They told me about the level of social life, the tedious tasks I will have to do, and so on.

They said that, previously, they had talked-up the position to attract someone only for them to leave once they realized the reality wasn't quite so great. So, if I took the job, I would not be shocked once I got to my desk.

In the end I didn't get the job, but this is the only interview I have been in that didn't try to hide the bad bits or to over-hype the good bits.

So, yeah, unrealistic expectations are an issue. But, I mostly blame the hiring company for talking out of their backsides in order to recruit.

It depends what you're after. (I have memberships on both)

Bear in mind that chess.com regularly has 10 times the number of players online at any one time, so it's much easier to find a game of your desired time controls and ability level.

Also, chess.com has much better material and functions to improve your rating for lower and intermediate rated players. For this reason alone I would recommend chess.com to lower ability players (although these features require a premium membership).

chessclub.com (ICC) has a greater number of GM's, etc. There are GM's and IM's on chess.com, but not as many as far as I can tell.

Finally, chess.com has outstanding "social" features, like teams and forums, etc, trolls notwithstanding.

So, I would without hesitation recommend chess.com for learners and intermediate players, and ICC for those who want to play against higher-rated players. I spend most of my time on chess.com and don't intend to extend my ICC membership.

UPDATE:

chessclub.com: 897 players currently online.

chess.com: 22,235 players currently online.

There was a time when chess.com didn't exist, and chessclub.com was the place to go. ICC's website now is a dog's breakfast and has been lacking in development for a long time. IMO, ICC had relied too much on the number of GM members at attract players. Chess.com, although more expensive, is a much more vibrant and educational place to be.

Not removing the client side images is not the bad bit. It's the marketing blurb that claimed they did exactly that.

Is it even meaningful to talk of guilt without morality?

If you posted a comment to HN with 127 spelling mistakes, which you then corrected, should you be applauded for that?

Seconded. When Dreamhost works, it is excellent. When it fails, it fails really, really badly and the support is often shockingly inept.

Just two examples from my painful membership:

1. I transferred a domain back into Dreamhost. Due to a bug in their system, it was immediately dropped and entered the redemption period, and asked me for a large redemption fee. Support was wholly unable to acknowledge any problem on their part, and only resolved it when I posted the issue on Webhostingtalk.com

2. After requesting a refund onto my credit card after another hideous incident, rather than crediting my card, they debited it. Again, support were completely unable to acknowledge any problem on their part. Instead, when I asked the reason why my card was debited, they said I was charged for "services" - but were unable to itemise the services I had been charged for when challenged. They only refunded the money as "courtesy" rather than an acknowledgement on their part.

Dreadful.

If your storage requirements are small, I strongly recommend medialayer.com. For a budget option, I recommend asmallorange.com

Indeed.

So, the point remains: what value does this advice have over against the advice from Google, etc? It's a rhetorical question, by the way.

Who said that that would be a defense we would use?

My point is that you have given advice, with the implication that it would soothe some of our concerns. And then, in the very next sentence, you've said, in effect, it's legally worthless.

So, how exactly does your own advice to us help in any way whatsoever?

  "We've made our position public, and we're satisfied that
 its an accurate reflection of our position and our
 understanding of Australian law. You must not rely on it as a legal basis
 for anything though"

I'm not sure if I see the value of you saying it, then. Why not get a lawyer to provide you with a position that can be relied upon?

The original was developed in Dundee. Rockstar North, who developed GTA V, are based in Edinburgh.

Thankfully, there are still a handful of game developers in Dundee. One of the original designers on GTA now runs Tag Games in Dundee, which does some quality mobile games.

If spending time with ones family is part of what it means to be a family, and when time/work pressures make it difficult to do so, I would say "accomplishment" is more than appropriate.

False dichotomy.

Spending time with ones family IS an accomplishment. Climbing a hill IS an accomplishment. Both pleasurable activities, to my mind.

The choice is between which accomplishments give you pleasure, not between accomplishments and pleasure.

It's quite possible Snowden has already passed on all his information to other parties. There's no need for Snowden to be the messenger any more.

<quote>...who will likely be absolutely furious with America, but even more so europe.</quote>

France, Italy, Spain and Portugal all agreed to deny this aircraft access to their airspace. Europe may be furious with America, but they are certainly not showing it by their actions.

Europe's bark is worse than it's bite - and America will be very satisfied with that.

This is ironic.

Snowden is able to pass through Russian territory because, according to the law of Russia, it is allowed. This, says Mr Kerry, is deeply troubling.

However, blanket monitoring of internet activity, which according to the law of the US, is allowed, is not deeply troubling?

> I'm not going to change much of what I do online. I'm not a violent revolutionary

The problem with this whole scenario is not how you view yourself, but how the government views you. They define if we are a threat, not ourselves.

It is a major thing but, as someone who's worked on it, how about addressing the parent's point?