jedimastert

I mean, the numbers are pretty significant, but like there really isn't a great argument when they're already talking about second non-primary homes. Like no one is forcing them to own them, it's not a necessity

Edit: I've done a little research, and it looks like they might only be changing the valuation method for the super expensive homes

It was, the 40 hour work week was hard fought for.

Also, 996 is apparently a thing

> But when they get into the business of slowing down technology adoption to protect workers, that's when they get into the territory of giving unions a bad name.

I would consider the emputus more on companies to not roll out new technology in a way that harms workers.

> I'm curious if there has ever been an instance where people have been able to "tame" a technology to consider a broader, societal good, or if we've always just been at the whims of how any particular tech naturally concentrates or dissipates power.

One example that comes to mind is cloning. It's technically fully possible to clone a human right now (as in make an embryo with one person's DNA), but it's wildly taboo.

> it's worth considering why it hasn't totally taken over "naturally".

Because is advantageous for employers to keep workers as close to the brink of burnout as possible as a method of control

This looks awesome, and I've been waffling about moving from Notion to something local/markdown based for a while. My only issue is that I really like using "databases"/tables, specifically for moving through processes ticket-style, in Notion. Does anyone know if there's something similar elsewhere? I'm not familiar with the knowledge-base/wiki space, I just kinda fell into notion.

I would say "open source markdown knowledge-base similar to Obsidian" but I'm not a marketing guy

So this is my art degree coming out, but I feel like invoking the name of Dogma 95 and the "vow of chastity" without what appears to be any of the original people involved or blessing feels a little lame, especially when the actual rules are pretty different from the original. At least, I don't see any indication of like a real personal connection to the original.

I feel like they probably should have come up with a different name and just noted the connection in the manifesto

I feel like people are reading this as "this is how the under signers think all movies should be made, and we are judging movies not made this way as a moral failing", when I think a better reading would be "as directors/film makers/story tellers, this is how we think we can maximize our own creativity and joy when we make movies".

> Nothing like rules for spurring creativity.

I feel like it's pretty well known in creative spaces that constraints breed creativity.

That's not really a computer helping you though, that's just a computer allowing a human that's far away to help you right?

> So I did the (imho) only sensible thing, and run Obsidian in a sandbox (bwrap). By doing so, I also made sure it runs in a separate networking namespace. For now, I disallow any internet access.

> The amount of rage I see here is a bit strange

Serious question: do you think it is actually obvious and technically accessable to everyday people to have the thought "I should run this in a sandbox" and do it?

Like no this is not some super elite haxxr tool, it's a text editor pretty explicitly advertised as being non-technical-person-friendly.

> There is no world where humans can coordinate in a way that reduces global emissions

They seem to have cooperated rather effectively on increasing them, so I wouldn't say "no world"?

> capital has no interest

Selfish humans. "Capital" is a mental model, it's not some force of nature or hand of god.

The IEEE rfcs does define a spot for the query string, but doesn't really say what to do with it.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3986#section-3.4

For anyone curious like I was, form-urlencoded and the URLSearchParam API says that params should not be deduplicated or reordered. "Get" will get the first value with the given name, and GetAll will get a list of all values

https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#dom-urlsearchparams-get

> one website (ab)uses query strings

Really not abusing abusing query strings from a standards perspective, a 404 is not an improper response to an unexpected query string

You know I was actually really curious about this so I went back to the HTML and URL W3C standards and surprisingly they don't actually have any definitions of format other than being percent encoded. One might conflate query strings with "form-urlencoded"[0] query strings, which is one potential interoperability format, but in general a queries string is just any percent encoded string following a "?" in a url[1], and just another property in the "URL" HTML object that can be used in the generation of a response. While additionally there is a URLSearchParams object that is the result of parsing the query string with the form-urlencoded parser, this is simply an interoperability layer for JavaScript.

I'm going to be honest, I was pretty geared up to have a contrarian opinion until I looked at the standards but they're actually pretty clear, a 404 could be a proper response to unexpected query string; query string is as much part of the URL API as the path is and I think pretty much everyone can acknowledge that just tacking random stuff onto the path would be ill advised and undefined behavior.

[0]: https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#application/x-www-form-urlencod...

[1]: https://url.spec.whatwg.org/#url-class

Markdown supports inline HTML for interactive elements, I think an interesting potential alternative would be an md doc with a known HTML template and simple build (e.g. single line pandoc command).

There's a local charity I donate to that does this, they've got I think 10 or 15 apartments they put people up in for 3 months, and offer them various forms of placement assistance while they're there. In the last annual report they had I believe a 95% success rate with people they checked in with a year later.

Unfortunately this is pretty selective evidence, but I know for a fact they don't exclude people on the basis of having mental illness or addiction problems, I've worked with them personally.

You know oddly enough, if you just put someone up in a real place to live for like a year, that's enough for the majority of people to get back on their feet.

I believe they based the design off of the reference schematic from a datasheet of one of the popular 555 timers, but I don't remember which one.

I didn't say should, I said are.

The rationale (which, again, I'm not arguing for or against) is that mocap performances are not strictly speaking totally the actors, because mocap has to be cleaned and can be (and very often is) edited and tweaked after the fact by animators. Not to mention there are often required liberties taken because a model cannot line up one to one with an actor anatomically.

In a sense, mocap performances are done by a team of animators where one animator puppeted a model in real time.

I would be surprised if it weren't already de facto banned, like how motion capture performances are essentially banned from Best Actor/Actress awards

Once stars started becoming a marketable metric, it's pretty much inevitable that they would be purchasable. Same as any other bot review market I suppose

Would it surprise you to find out that there are many people who are opposed to golf courses for the same reasons?

I mean, I know a lot of people who are also against golf courses for very similar reasons

I'm personally a fan of the ti-30xs. Still cheap and a good number of features for looking at data

Would it even be possible for a model to know its own version number? I guess maybe if they decide to put it in the system prompt or something