This sentiment is so predictable and boring. Also the article literally says the motivation was knee pain meant he couldn’t run more than a few minutes. Maybe people aren’t the cartoons you have in your head.
No you’re not alone in it. But yes there are plenty of us who find it a really effective way to get drawn into an article. It works for me through infectious enthusiasm. If I have a sense of a curious mind trying to figure something out, I get interested in the thing they’re trying to figure out too. Bill Bryson’s Short History of Nearly Everything made me interested in tons of scientific areas I never considered interesting before, because it is all about fascinating people repeatedly failing then eventually succeeding in understanding some natural phenomenon. The human angle is the perfect gateway for me. Maybe if I had more discipline I could just force myself to start reading a dry, factual scientific article in a field of little immediate interest to me until I start to notice data points that pique my own curiosity. But it’s so much easier for me to get infected with the curiosity of some compelling character who is overflowing with it. And it sticks better in the memory.
If it’s a field I already have a strong personal interest/background in, then I generally just want to get straight to the findings, so in that case I wouldn’t read a long form popsci article like this one. But calories/diet/exercise stuff? For me that’s not very exciting, yet I do want to understand it better (for practical benefit), so anything that helps pique my curiosity in it is good.
It's not just the odd flubbed line, it's loads of problems. I hear a lot of stories about it. Sometimes the narrator's pronunciation of a weird name can drift, very gradually, and the engineer then has to go a long way back to figure out where the drift started, and get them to restart from there. It has to sound natural and flowing, so no you can't just re-record individual lines and splice them in later, they would stand out and it would sound shit. That's why it can take up to a few hours to get one hour of audio down. (But not 5-12 hours, he says that's a huge exaggeration.)
He's constantly listening out for mispronunciations, unwanted pace changes, mouth noises etc. He frequently has to stop the narrator, listen to it back, get them to do a whole bit again... That's why it can take up to 3 hours just to get one hour of audio down. Not 5-12 hours though.
My housemate is an audiobook recording engineer. I just asked him about it. He says in the best case, with a skilled narrator, an hour of audiobook can take only 1 hour 10 minutes to record. In the worst case it can take up to three hours. I asked him if it could ever take up to five hours and he said no way, never.
Totally agree and to be honest I slightly misunderstood your original comment. You’re definitely being helpful to politely encourage use of the prefix conventions where they are a good fit.
I'm curious, what problem does it create for you, clicking a link you momentarily thought was to an external site before realising it's actually a discussion on this site? Honest question, you might have a good answer, I'm not trying to be rhetorical.
If you actually get some value from re-reading and reorganising your old notes, that's great. It sounds like you don't have the problem the author is addressing. But many people write tons of notes and save them but almost never look at them again, and subsequently worry they're wasting time writing and saving all these notes. This author is saying this worrying is misplaced, it's not a waste of time. The act of writing a note is valuable for tidying up the ideas in your head, even if you never look at them again. And that while you don't really need to save them (as you've already had the value from writing them), it can be easier and quicker to just save all your random notes, as a general policy, because trying to determine which notes have potential future utility is fairly pointless and stressful activity. Notes don't really cost anything to store. This policy doesn't work so well for physical possessions.
If I write my friend's birthdays on a calendar, prompting me to contact them on their birthdays, do you think that's treating them as assets not friends? If not, what is the relevant difference?
> Our mission is to make app logic accessible to the entire team, including developers, designers, and stakeholders. Using state machines and statecharts as a common visual language, the software development cycle becomes more collaborative, eliminating handoff and tightening the feedback loop.
For me the more interesting benefit is how it might help an individual developer with designing/coding complex machines in the first place. Many devs value instant visual confirmation after each tiny code change, in a tight feedback loop that leads to a smooth, creative flow state. The GUI side of front-end dev is usually done this way in frameworks like Next.js. Using this new Stately editor via its VS Code plugin might create similar conditions when working on core application logic.
It's the first public beta release, after a huge amount of open source work. Hopefully they'll support Safari soon.
If you're a VS Code user, it's also available as a VS Code plugin, which seems more advanced and useful than the browser app is currently anyway. It has bi-directional editing, which looks very useful.
Cancel culture doesn’t mean people deciding to stop listening to you. It means people actively attacking your reputation so that others are less likely to hear you. It often involves intimidation tactics that mess with your real life, e.g. finding out where you work and creating bad PR that will go away if your employer fires you, or PM’ing your associates to suggest they distance themselves from you publicly if they don’t want to get tangled up in this themselves. Hopefully the people doing this will always make the right decision and only do it to people who really deserve it, but I wouldn’t bet on it.
Could you elaborate what you mean here? It seems obvious that it’s consistent with their business model, but I don’t get what point you’re making by saying that. Or how this means the debate is a red herring. Can you thread this together a bit?
That’s just Twitter’s redirection proxy. It’s not people using it as a URL shortener. It is Twitter automatically linking all URLs in tweets to go via t.co for tracking.
Once the water settles and you’re completely still, it feels like absolutely nothing on your skin. Zero change from moment to moment in any kind of signal. Sensory deprivation is apt. When you move slightly, you can feel the water.
I don’t mean to be rude, but if you can’t center content without googling and getting frustrated, you might just need to slow down and take 5 minutes to actually learn how to do it, and let it sink in once and for all. It’s been very straightforward for several years now. The idea that it’s difficult is just an old meme at this point.
That definition does not say “avoids any change”. It says it opposes change, which can reasonably be taken as a general leaning. I mean, just think about it, do you think you could find even one single small-c conservative who argues that every possible change is bad?
Off topic, but there is something intensely irritating about replies that start with “No.” It’s fine to disagree and argue whatever point you want, but when you open with “No.” it seems like you’re saying “You are objectively wrong; I will now enlighten you with the correct viewpoint.”