puglr

To your point, comments in any internet community are not such indicators.

Forgive my ignorance, but this is progress, correct? A stepping stone along the path to "quantum algorithms that we do care about"?

As a former AOL user, it was truly a walled garden. For hordes of less tech-savvy users like myself, AOL was the internet. Many of us had little concept of an internet "beyond" AOL.

The current situation might be referred to as "windowed gardens". We get to look around and choose the fiefdom we hate the least.

...progress?

On someone else's Cox connection and seeing ~450 with the Google search results test but only ~150 with the fast.com test. Interesting.

That they built a working Xbox One (before it had even been announced) just by looking at the spec sheets etc. and buying the parts on Newegg is incredible.

Isn't that GP's point? Parents in 2022 have a dramatically reduced ability to prevent their children from staring at a screen all day everyday. Even in school, they are glued to their screens. Even if you don't provide them a phone, they have cheap and easy ways to obtain their own.

Edit to add: The dad forcing his kid outside no longer stops them from staring at the screen all day.

What a great tool for generating fictional maps.

In my recent interviewing cycle I got dinged in most interviews for not being a React expert. Every panel knew going in that my React experience was recent and limited. I have 4+ years of relevant domain experience at a FAANG on my resume. I laughed with interviewers about how every few years the de facto tech stack changes and every team I've ever joined required me to learn completely new (to me) frameworks. Still got dinged.

I wish what you're saying was the truth but I think it's very much the minority.

To add to this, prior to the internet it really wasn't that bad of a "password". Once upon a time vacuuming up batches of SSNs for nefarious purposes wasn't a realistic attack scenario, let alone a "just assume every criminal has your SSN" one.

> Why is it limited to a “who”?

"Who" implies a human. The topic is human rights. I'm not sure I follow what this particular question is trying to get at.

> Why is it linked to sex or gender?

Pro answer: It isn't. We've known this since prehistoric times.

Con answer: Because only a man and a woman can create a new human life on their own.

> Is this a singular love or is polygamy a human right?

Age differences would have made for a better example here. But my answer would be that this question is that it frankly doesn't matter for my example. I.e., one does not need to answer the question of "how many people should we allow someone to marry" to answer the question of "should people be allowed to marry someone with the same genitals as themselves". Indeed, our global reality reflects that.

> What’s the fundamental human right?

What I previously stated: "loving who you want without regard to sex or gender". Notice that it does not say "without regard to singular vs plural love" or "without regard to reciprocation" or anything else.

> Shouldn’t we be worried that these so-called human rights are being newly discovered relatively recently?

That's... how it works.

We (or at least Western society) don't enshrine rights into laws and constitutions until we realize something we ought to be allowed to do freely is being unduly infringed upon. That's a process that doesn't stop.

We should be worried when we stop "discovering" new rights, not the other way around. Humanity has yet to produce a generation that "has it all figured out" with respect to fundamental rights, and there is no reason to assume we ever will.

> The issue at hand here is not this resolution in itself. It's the fact that opening up human rights to "new" rights sets a precedent. And that precedent will be used by other countries to shift the language on human rights in a more authoritarian direction - or dilute human rights as such.

It occurs to me that this same argument can be used against anything that ought to be enshrined at the UN as a human right. An obvious example being loving who you want without regard to sex or gender.

What are the actual remedies available to you in your jurisdiction? Which one(s) are you pursuing?

This wouldn't prevent the recording from being used as evidence. It just helps limit the spread on social media due to the resulting DMCA takedowns.

You see police use this tactic a lot in "First Amendment Auditor" videos. It makes it very difficult for the auditor to monetize the video.

> the algorithms which suppress videos from the disabled

I would be interested in reading more about this.

"reconstruct conversation glass vibration" brings up a lot of relevant results from a 2014 story from MIT. Sounds like it works in principle with any medium that can have its visible vibrations monitored (bag of chips is the main example, but they talk about other options such as plants or a glass of water).

> I don't see college kids being encouraged to drop out and make a fortune in tech. In fact what I do see are people being encouraged to graduate at the top of their class so they can get jobs at highly profitable FAANG companies.

I've only worked at one FAANG company, but they actively encourage every good intern to drop out and start working full time.

Worked at a few startups gobbled up by Google. Second time decided to stick around. I think Google is an overall incredible company to work for. Far from perfect (and getting worse in some important areas of employee happiness), but I'd do it again.

I just need to be my own boss for a while. Working on things that you're not 100% passionate about can really wear one down.

It looks like that period is not reflecting a full week (hence the final "last 7 days" column).