josefdlange

Oh, duh. Wow, dumb me. One of those "can't see the forest for the trees" mistakes on my part. Thanks for the reality check!

But why not spend ten minutes and make their net code use SSL and then avoid it altogether?

I guess one could argue that the footprint of adding SSL client behavior to a sneaky hidden tracker might be shitty to do and make it more identifiable. But also SSL libraries are typically linkable on the host system anyway, no compilation past the headers needed.

It's just a weird "workaround" on their part if that's the intention.

Stranger is that they feel like they need to open a "hidden" browser instance to connect to the internet. A browser isn't really a necessary part of establishing a connection -- unless there's some missing context here. Is my grandmother running the CIA data ops division?

Edit: it's been made clear to me that of course this is one of few viable vectors when approaching outbound network with a really restrictive firewall (like Little Snitch). If a browser is already approved on making a given connection, then using a headless instance to do network talking is a smart way to do it. If you roll your own net code, a tool like LS will notify user and/or block. Dumb me!

I get the whole "cautionary tale" thing, but you should probably contact Apple to remedy both your personal loss and so that they have more information about failing components. In my experience they take this stuff very seriously.

How strange -- I did not write this comment. More interestingly, my password was changed on my account recently and I had to reset it to get logged back in.

What gives?

If you were really clever, you could just store some data structure that is the IDs of the post and the desired comments and use the API to pull them on page load (maybe with a nice cache layer).

In that case, you're just curating and displaying HN content without hosting it.

Juuuust gonna leave this here...

http://xkcd.com/1758/

The last line is the important one.

> It's not their fault, they didn't choose this. You did.

That's exactly right. You chose it. You chose to be a partner to that person. In the case of marriage, typically that means "in sickness and in health" and so you either step up to the plate and be the support they need, or you realize your mistake and move on before it destroys both of you.

That's the positive (yet realistic) take on what you're saying here, which I hope is your intent.

I'm a little bothered by your characterization of partnership with someone with a mental health condition as "...tiptoeing through the fucking minefield of their emotions..."

Mental health issues are not emotions. They may interplay to a degree, but do not mistake clinical anxiety or depression for someone being excessively emotional. It is a medical disorder of the brain that causes it to malfunction. My ending statement is a bit hyperbolic, but not really: dismissing a mental health disorder as emotions is how people end up dead.

That is devilish.

I definitely used the wrong word -- I intended this meaning.

These are all better and more knowledgeable points than my own! I definitely only speak out of an abundance of caution having known people whose bad electricity and habits have damaged property.

This is the right way to use those! It's so rare to hear of proper usage.

A certain vintage of Apple adapters have plastic posts where the ground would otherwise attach. This image is iPad 10W adapters, but the same follows for some older iBook/MacBook chargers:

https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-05fa7f5f0e6ce0dc43bf8c...

Ungrounded adapter + bad mains power = zap!

Ungrounded adapter + clean mains power = probably no zap

Grounded adapter + bad mains power = probably no zap

Grounded adapter + clean mains power = no zap

It's not just the adapter and it's not just the mains power; it's when both come together. Electricity follows pretty simple rules when it comes down to it.

Always always always ground your A/C connections. Why wouldn't you?

Also, never use one of these unless you've attached the little wire/alligator terminal to a ground somewhere:

http://www.prestonelectronics.com/audio2/ttip/images/gndadap...

This! I mean, it's not full of every feature and every performance optimization, but you know what? It is still the best tool for the job.

Silly as this is, I've often thought about digitally recording smells for re-emission. For the consumer it probably isn't very useful, but having been knee-deep in the theatre world in my college years, I longed for the opportunity to contribute "smell design" to productions. Smell is often described as the sense most strongly tied to emotional response, and so using it as a tool to evoke emotion in the theater would be really interesting!

This sounds like Gavin from Silicon Valley.

"Today, effective immediately, I, Gavin Belson, founder and CEO of Hooli, am forced to officially say goodbye to the entire Nucleus division. All Nucleus personnel will be given proper notice and terminated. But make no mistake. Though they're the ones leaving, it is I who must remain and bear the heavy burden of their failure."

Is there a link to a small cut of the footage somewhere? Obviously it may not be represented 100% on our MacBook Pros, but I'm interested in seeing the high frame rate at work in this instance more than the extreme resolution.

But the subtraction is simpler. I didn't want to confuse anyone with moduloing a negative number.

`m` is the result; this scratch here is meant to resemble algebra, not programming.

You know, solve for `m`, etc.

Gist of this, since formatting got screwy: https://gist.github.com/josefdlange/04c9eb14a9ddbdfae8eb2e34...

Seeing the others' answers I don't think matters in this solution.

The strategy -- given that it's allowable to discuss strategy before drawing cards -- is each person has a different modulo result (x) they have to compute the number they must add [to the sum of the other three], (m) in the following algebra. Solve for m to get the suit your should guess.

x = ([sum of others] + m) % 4

Suits: 0: Diamond 1: Heart 2: Club 3: Spade

Example: [PLAYER]: (SUIT THEY HAVE), (CHOSEN MODULO RESULT) A: (0) (0) B: (1) (1) C: (3) (2) D: (3) (3)

For A's m: ((1 + 3 + 3) + m) % 4 == 0, therefore m = 1 For B's m: ((0 + 3 + 3) + m) % 4 == 1, therefore m = 3 For C's m: ((0 + 1 + 3) + m) % 4 == 2, therefore m = 2 For D's m: ((0 + 1 + 3) + m) % 4 == 3, therefore m = 3

D guesses correct.

There are many permutations of the drawn cards, but I think this one does solve it. All props to the person up this thread who initially answered the 4-player problem; I'm just explaining their methodology as I understood it.

That is very, very clever.

Thanks for the info -- I think that's covered in what I describe in my edit, though likely not as directly as this. In my edit I realized that an open app with no open windows causes this behavior; a window being confined in the Dock must behave the same way.

Pressing a modifier key to see alternate options is further "down" than "just beneath"?

Command + ` (back-tick, right above your Tab key)

I have literally never encountered this specific UX issue. Having using OS X and macOS for just about its entire fifteen year lifespan, I don't even know how or why it would happen, to be honest.

The only issue I encounter here and there is if I have windows scattered across spaces and full-screen windows, switching just to the app usually picks the wrong window, and then because of the full-screen window complications, I can't simple Command+` around, I need to use Spaces shortcuts to navigate to the left or right.

Edit: I think I understand the scenario after thinking a few more minutes: you've closed all the windows of an application, but you have not exited the application entirely. I agree with the existing behavior. I don't want apps spawning new windows every time I go to them. If I want the window later, I don't close it. If I just don't want to see it, I hide the app -- but not minimizing it in the Dock either. Hiding it is like turning the other way, minimizing is like folding it up and putting it in my pocket. If I just hid it, I can just turn back to it when I want it. If I folded it up, I have to go through the "pain" of unfolding.

No editing here but that's okay. I only just came back to this conversation now :D

I think Delorean, Pendulum, Arrow, etc, aim to make dealing with dates more understandable and less painful. It's perfectly possible to fully grasp all the technicalities of pytz/dateutil/datetime -- and I recommend that anybody who has to deal with dates and times in Python do so -- but if you'd rather not think about it all and are okay with deferring some control to the opinions of one of these libraries, that's when you probably pull them off the shelf instead of the aforementioned trio.

What benefits does this have over [Delorean](http://delorean.readthedocs.io/en/latest/)?

The README for Pendulum seems to show me one feature Delorean doesn't explicitly have -- `is_weekend()` -- otherwise these libraries are conceptually very similar.

I do agree that this (and Delorean) is a usability improvement over `datetime` and perhaps even Arrow (though I'm not tremendously familiar with Arrow).

This project is still in its infancy but I was frustrated that I couldn't find a Slack Bot library in Python that was more than a single command-response framework.

This is a first pass at allowing stateful conversations. Hope you like it! Please feel free to contribute questions, comments, or code!

This! This!

I used to lose chargers frequently, when I was in college, but I didn't take good care of them. Knowing how I treated them then (Stuff in bag, and even if I wound it, it was without the slack you're supposed to give the cord coming off the brick) it doesn't surprise me that I destroyed so many.

Now, I've had the same charger for three years without issue. I suppose part of that lifespan improvements is I really have two of them -- one for my desk that never moves, and one that's always secured in my bag and well-wound.

I wonder if I had just one and moved around with it all the time if things would be different.