ridaj

I mean the sad thing about this one is that of all the vox pop content producers, Asian Boss doesn't do nearly the worst manipulation or selective editing. (The worst ones make people sound like idiots, which is unfortunately pretty easy.) Some of their content is genuinely powerful for it and frankly this video on the whole is pretty amazing by the thoughtfulness of the people they interview. It's too bad that they had to arrange something to get a pro-unification viewpoint on camera, but it would've been ok if they'd just owned up to it with a brief caption introducing that person as who they are. The real problem is they didn't do that and I do agree with TFA that it's a bad ethical lapse.

I don't take this vox pop crap for more than what it is either, but this is about as honest as some China-based channel arranging an interview with Alex Jones in a random park and passing it off as the voice of a random American man of the street

Some aspects of Chinese culture remained through the cultural revolution, but some previously important cultural features, like those related to music or Buddhism for example, were nearly wiped out. Maybe as a result, to this day some of the biggest hitting Mandarin singers are Taiwanese. In the movie space, HK used to produce lots of great movies, but many of them couldn't be made anymore given the HK takeover and how mainland movie production is now driven by propaganda goals. I hope to see Taiwan pick it up.

I'm aware of solutions that can help prepare for a backup. I don't think most people should trust themselves to handle backup responsibilities. Speaking as someone locked out of an encrypted disk full of old photos that I carefully wrote down the passphrase to on a piece of paper for safekeeping... Since then lost.

Another thing, this makes things harder to reverse.

Some engines have join-order-dependent performance, so there are instances where you would want to write

``` FROM orders LEFT JOIN customers USING (customer_id) ```

and others where you'd want to write

``` FROM customers RIGHT JOIN orders USING (customer_id) ```

Swapping join order with current syntax is relatively easy since references in the same FROM clause are interchangeable. But in this proposal, the reference to the joined table isn't written out, so it would be pretty complicated to reverse join order.

Use authenticator app for 2FA, not your phone number.

But be really sure you want to do this. The main reason I would not recommend ordinary consumers do this, is that if you lose your SIM (eg, stolen or lost phone), you can go to a mobile phone shop and get a new SIM card issued to you after verifying your identity. With other forms of 2FA, you do not have access to the same real-life-based identity verification service, and it is also essentially the source of SIM-swap risk.

Curious what API limitations are preventing you from doing the transcription device-local on Android?

Well in that case I guess you're not banking on the phone even if they solve the spam call problem...

US telcos know at best two things at this point: keep the network up and collect rent. They cannot solve complicated social problems like spam or internet security. They just don't have the skills or the willingness to invest. We will all continue to pay them if only for internet access, and for a good price too thanks to countless mergers leaving consumers with few choices, but they are otherwise transforming into dumber and dumber pipes at a pretty fast clip. There's more profit to be made for them being a dumb pipe while device and OS manufacturers pick up the security / spam slack for free (eg, how much is anyone actually willing to pay for spam filtering) because it lets them provide a trusted environment to sell apps and ads in.

I think it's likely that some banks will start building better communication features inside their apps because of this. IMO the telecom companies in the US lack not just the incentives but the skill to fix the spam problem, so people are just becoming blind to phone calls and texts, with phones abetting that blindness with spam filtering features.

Can you share names? Asking for a friend ... Although if they are small companies, I would be wary of anecdata... The narrative sounds good but small companies are more likely than large companies to exhibit extreme behavior in any metric, and it's likely that there's some confirmation bias in reporting what works / doesn't work

Seems like every company in tech is losing engineers left and right at this point

Yes, the solution sounds excellent if we take that premise at face value, but I do wonder about the premise.

I wonder if the low level production assistants tasked with putting together the credit lists cost enough to justify the work going into this.

No, it acknowledges that common practice varies such that there is no canonical ordering, and tries to get at an ordering that, when applied, minimizes difference with common practice.

Those guys can probably crop at the projector though and not lose too much? Last I played with projectors was around 2010 and back then crop controls already came standard

I'm not saying it's malicious, I'm just saying it's a trade-off. Fwiw I understand the trade-off and it makes sense to me even as a Mac user.

This is desktops creeping towards an attitude, familiar on Apple's phones, in which the user is essentially untrusted to make security decisions. Because let's face it nobody seriously audits the security of software going onto Macs. The loser is the user's freedom to enjoy the computer as a true general-purpose tool.

Small producers spend lots of money on equipment in that range of cost, even for ancillary things like lighting and cables. I think it's a great recommendation.

I think a better employer only looks at history insofar as it's a predictor of future potential. Gaps in employment history that relate to personal challenges, be they medical, family related, or motivational, shouldn't be seen as black marks as long as they're resolved and skills are current. People may have grown during these periods more than you might think.

I've had this happen to a friend. After some years toiling in obscure startups, he made his money, stopped working, bought a nice house, a nice car... And within two years was bored senseless. He joined a big company as an entry level SWE, not really caring about the money at all, but just so he'd have something to do with his time. A decade later he's happily retired but I think it took him some time to find a way to enjoy it.

Money buys you some freedom. Freedom to experiment, freedom not to stress out about making ends meet. The flip side of freedom is that it forces you to have to make weighty decisions.

This happens all the time, for example, when young people inherit fortunes. Some end up doing drugs and/or spending it all - this freedom can definitely wreck lives. One approach that I'm told can help is to define your values and live them out.

For example, you said you created startups. I assume it wasn't just because you were hoping for a payday. Was it because you enjoyed the creative process? Or was it because you wanted to help solve problems? Can you do more of this now that money allows you to?

Or, is your idea of a happy life centered in family, and in that case, what are you doing to start a successful one? Not that it's exclusive of other values.

But basically this freedom lifted your boat from being in the harbor where the channels it could go into were very clear, to being in the high seas where you can go anywhere. You're obviously in the fog. You now need to clarify your life goals to lift the fog, define where you want to take the boat before it bobs towards a storm. Good luck :) it's still a problem to solve but it's a good one to solve.

Recommend reading "Jackpot" by Michael Mechanic, which talks about how the "jackpot moment" affects people.

Prime whataboutism. But anyways, just as one example, the Tulsa race massacre was the subject of a major recent TV series (The Watchmen). Mere mentions of Tiananmen square massacre, observing quiet vigils, etc. could get you jailed in China. On freedom of speech, there is no possible comparison. Even the existence of this very conversation would be immediately censored on the Chinese domestic internet.

I don't know if you've lived through an industry downturn but that's a risk you might want to hedge against. Software/tech has had so much growth that it hasn't really had a bad year yet. Long term, even the dot com crash or the 2008 recession weren't super impactful.

My guess is, you are doing enough and aren't enough of a troublemaker that your boss cares to do anything about it, but you're not fooling anyone either. In a structural downturn, they're getting pressure to downsize and you're at the top of the list. None of your colleagues who move on to better pastures will vouch for you anywhere else because they don't trust you to pull your weight. You find yourself pretty unsupported at that point.

At the end of the day, I personally choose to stay sharp at work because it's my personal ethic, but there's also a real risk component that you may want to consider, although as long as the industry is structurally growing you probably don't have to worry too much about it.

... or why your next design review should probably ask "is this input format a Turing-complete language?"

This shows how un-theoretical that question is.

Thanks, that explains things. I guess I was confused by it being called here and there a "zero-day" - if it's the patch that triggered exploitation, then at least it was already fixed at head by the time it got exploited.

I'm curious about the disclosure of this vulnerability and why it seems that no prior notice appears to have been given by the researcher who published it. Is it because it was already being exploited in the wild?

I believe the correct package in this instance is `condolences`

Yes, the new thing is the emergence of mega corporations that profit from platforms that are essentially manufacturing workaholics. Freewill notwithstanding, exploitative incentives are a real thing...

There's at least a potential moral responsibility (yes pls spare snark about banks and morals), and in some countries it can be a legal one, see eg emergence of the "right to disconnect"

The challenge is that many of them have unsustainable always-on relationships with their audience that seriously burn them out. Sure folks should be free to do what they want with their life but remember they're not the only ones getting the benefit, they're feeding a bunch of social and merchandising platforms that make big $ on their backs - so the question becomes, what responsibility does the platform have towards the health of its creators?