justAlittleCom

I think this web page is really superficial, contain some factual error, and miss the important points. - impedance has nothing do to with power. A watt is a watt, impedance is only the ratio between current and voltage. The misconception comes from the fact is that most amplifier are voltage amplifier : the higher the impedance, the less acoustical power you get for the same input signal. But it has nothing to do with electrical power, with a current amplifier it would be the other way around. - sensitivity has everything to do with power, it says how much acoustic pressure you get for 1 watt. When considering "how loud my headphone will get ?" sensitivity is way more important than impedance.

To me, the 3 important things are : - the topology, you dont listen to music in public transport in a open headphone - the impedance, but only because of the matching with the amplifier. A lot of amplifier output impedance are simply too high (mostly for electrical protection as the output can be brefly shorted when introducing the jack), so, the headphone impedance need to be significantly higher. If the output impedance of the amplifier and the impedance of the headphone are close, it will impact the frequency response of the headphone. - the frequency response.

That's not really her point, she says "even professional electrician" and so on, she adopt a very of moral approach and I am not very fond of moral.

It's a substantial risk of death only if you doing it wrong. I mean, the problem here is not playing with a microwave transformer, it's doing it inside, it's holding both electrodes in both hands, it's the lack of isolation, it's having a device you can switch on by accident and so on.

A lot of people here seems to consider it's moral imperative to not do that, this wont make people smarter, nor more reasonable.

I am sorry but I strongly disagree with most comments here. I do a lot of things potentially extremely dangerous, like burning wood with a microwave, or driving a motorcycle, or playing with hydrogen and oxygen in stoichiometric ratio, I tried to melt a wrench with a 12V battery, and all that makes me a better engineer and a better person, more aware of the weakness of flesh and how reality is scary and how it dont care about our stupid meaty body.

I feel I see a lot of class contempt here, "those stupid people dont know that it's dangerous, they should stick with devices conceived by us. We educated people put stupid warning labels on it just for them". Of course, those poor soul should have been more aware of the danger, but censuring those video, or forbidding them to play with microwave, is that really what we want ? Anybody should be aware about the basic physics, that's the real problem here. I dont want to see moral video "dont do that because it's wrong", I would more video like "look at that how dangerous it is, and also, how cool is that".

About electroboom, I am the only one to think that being zapped again and again does a really poor job at passing the message "electricity is dangerous and can kill you"? If some people dont understand the dangerousity of electricity, maybe they just learnt from electroboom. I much prefer the channel "diode gone wild".

Mechanical watch nerd here. This describe an ETA (swiss) movement, I really prefer the Japanese movement (I know mostly seikos). The mechanism are more simple and more robust. For instance, on ETA the crown mechanism is really sensitive, a lot of tiny fragile parts with a lot of tension in them, it go wrong easily.

Also, seeing this web page I got frustrated by the fact it doesn't tackle what got me the hardest time: how can the crown move the hands without any clutch mechanism (some have) ? It's a matter of friction and torque, so it's hard to get while reasoning on a "perfect" mechanism.

Where did they study ? (real question here, because USA is really good at attracting brilliant people from everywhere).

About parcoursup, nobody really knows up to my knowledge.

About the tuition for foreigner, very few university applied it, and it has been declared unconstitutional by the "conseil constitutionnel" (it's kind of the french supreme court).

It's a moral obligation, yes. Plus, it's still nowadays a very powerful lever to keep relationship with local elites.

I dont understand how it is so special. Every single realworld sort I have seen are hybrid sorts. Very often merge sort + insertion sort or bubble sort for small sub-array.

Can you englight me ?

what is "free time"? I consider doing most of those things on my "free time". When I go excercise, I have no obligation do to so, I do it on my "free time". If I had kid, I'd consider spending time with them as "free time with my kids". I dont like this pessimistic perception of time, and it's not mine. The only non free time I have, is the one I "owe" to my employer. And this time, I freely give it to him, and If I wasn't contractually require to do so, I'd probably do the very same thing (I teach and research at uni).

It's funny because I could write a "viewing probability graphs as matrices"

For me, probabilities are graphs, and matricess is just a way to represent those.

I have a very similar experience with bépo (french dvorak-like layout).

Game of thrones + linguistic meetings (things like "go talk english afterwork", you'll find one in every big city in the world, of if you dont, organize one!)

Macron is NOT socialist (he told it himself) (Well, to be fair, he also told that he was (cf youtube link for both)). He's pure and simple right-wing. He believe that we should let the market treat workers as they please. That's what we call "Being liberal" in Europe. Its the opposite of being socialists: the government should protect the workers from the institutions who wants to exploit them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EBeAoFfXpg

Dont let the name "parti socialiste" fools you, it was once a socialist party, but in the early 80's, it became social liberal, and during the 00's, just liberal. And not the "nice boss liberal" one, no, the pretty dumb hard-core one. With proto-fascists shits in it.

Macron is in the right wing of the french PS, the party betrayed its own candidate (choosen by the electors by a primary) to back him up.

And Macron idea's are simple : whatever is good for the richs and the powerfull is good for the country.

So… Low salary, no labour law, no state services, more europe, less democracy, etc.

He's like Margaret Thatchers with fewer hairs.

That's ungodly.

In France we have a ISP (Numericable) who had a shitty system to map the IP to the user. Each time the system didn't found the person, he didn't return an error but, someone, always the same dude. Poor dude… https://www.cnil.fr/fr/avertissement-public-nc-numericable-p...

Disruption talks more about "what the thing did to everything" than about the "what the thing does to whoever use it". Bicycle is considered a disruption because everyone had one as soon as it was invented, supersonic privet jet are not. Maybe Instagram does new things, but that's not what would make it disruptive, only the impact it had, would. That impact is not obvious to me.

I think disruption is a very nice and simple concept, very powerful, and so overused… Its not a synonym for "new and successful". How Instagram is a disruptive innovation? Its a real question, maybe it is, and I am just too old to figure it out.

How does this compare to eyes tracking? 90% of the hyper fancy things using brain activity get pwned by simple eye tracking. Or are not usable in real life due to the equipment needed.

I see the point and it is interesting, it's just not big O ^^ If I replace in my head all O(thing) by MyCustomComplexityMeasureYetToBeDefinedProperly(thing) then it makes perfect sens.

I am sorry... but no, the article is interesting and well written, but it has nothing to do with big O notation. Random access in memory is still in O(1), it doesn't depend on the size of the data structure (I am assuming that is the "n" the author talk about by pretending that a memory access is O(sqrt(n)). Even if you have a very complex memory architecture with 15 caching levels, spread all over the world, if you have a maximum of 5 day delay for accessing your memory through the mail, it will still be O(1), because 5 day is constant, it does not depend on the size of the data structure.

The "n" the author is really talking about may be the depth of the cache hierarchy.