sdrothrock

This paragraph is worded a bit confusingly, but it was pretty clear to me: the fifth freedom is the fifth of nine aviation freedoms from a treaty signed in 1944.

Airline 1 from Country A

Airline 2 from Country B

Airline 1 is allowed to fly from A to B, refuel in B, and then fly from B to C. But the fifth freedom allows Airline 1 to pick up people in country B and provide them cheap flights to country C, thus competing with Airline 2, which is native to country B.

It could be entirely possible that my understanding is incorrect, though... but that's what I got from their explanation.

I do completely agree with other posters that this is thinly-veiled advertising, though. This stands out with their Japan flights for me, since I live in Japan and occasionally look for tickets.

It's interesting that they point the price for Osaka-Honolulu because it's surprisingly low (~80% cheaper), but they conveniently neglect to mention that the Tokyo-LA flight is only 10-15% cheaper than a domestic airline.

The original title is "Clubhouse announces new collaboration tool and free version of its project management platform", I'm not sure if it changed or was editorialized here.

I thought it was interesting that the HN title ("Jira competitor Clubhouse launches free plan, Confluence competitor") emphasizes Jira (to frame Clubhouse).

Some people have said that they wish movement was faster; I completely agree with that.

I also wish that more of the interface were integrated into the "museum" -- it would be nice to be able to go to other subreddits from within the museum itself rather than having to leave and go to the address bar.

I'd also like to be able to see comments somehow, since that's 80% of the experience of reddit for me!

The movement speed is definitely a dealbreaker though.

One distinction that I do want to make (that was made to me as an undergrad studying both Classics and Philosophy) is that we do want to remember that Phaedo is essentially third-hand information. It is written by Plato based on his understanding and editing of conversations he had with students of Socrates.

My professors always made this very clear and stressed that while it is common to consider things in the Platonic dialogues as Socratic canon, they were not, in fact, written by Socrates at all or in his immediate time period; as I recall, they were written a few decades after his death.

Whenever people ask about the two watches (and it has been EXTREMELY rare), I just point out how convenient it is.

Also, check out Stormin' Norman Schwarzkopf: https://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/12/27/16866f394f281e17a80...

For men, (to me) it means that they're big, strong, and muscular.

For women, (to me) it means that they're whatever kind of woman the speaker prefers.

So, as a kid, Arnold, Sly, and Hulk Hogan were all built like brick shithouses. But so was Cindy Crawford.

The Culture Map by Erin Meyer goes into this a bit; one of the key traits she uses to assess cross-cultural communication is how directly cultures give/take negative feedback.

There are two things to reply to here from that book:

1. The stereotype for a lot of the world is that Americans are direct, much like you said here -- but this isn't the case for ALL types of communication.

2. There's a scale specifically for negative feedback from "direct" to "indirect" for various cultures and the US is shown in the middle of that scale.

The UK is also listed around the middle, but more toward the "indirect" side than the US.

For more extreme examples, Russia, Germany, and France are listed as tending toward more direct negative feedback, whereas Japan and Indonesia are listed as tending toward more indirect negative feedback.

It's a fascinating book that really opened my eyes about ways to perceive cultures and communication, so if this is anything you're at all interested in, I'd really recommend it.

> On a mildly more serious note, I remember well my first ever serious business meeting in the US, where we pitched a potential joint venture to another company. 30 minutes of mutual praise about the awesome potential of the idea and positive affirmations of how we're totally going to do this ensued... and immediately after we left, my (American) business partner dropped the smile, said "welp, that went badly" and stated that there was no way in hell they'd proceed.

This kind of situation is also discussed in the book! ;)

Edit: I bring this book up relatively frequently, but I'm not associated with the publisher or author at all. The book was an absolute revelation for me in that it gave me a way to conceptualize cultural differences rather than the traditional/stereotypical "good/bad" scale, so I like to pay it forward and recommend it to people who seem like they might be interested in it.

Thank you! You just made me realize that there some ambiguity in the original article and thus in my reply; I have nothing against cherry-pick in git and first thought the original article was using the phrase idiomatically, as in "developers picked specific commits with their personal judgment."

The rest of this response will be written with that idiomatic reading in mind since that's what I originally intended with my criticism.

> I suspect one of the problems here is a lack of bug tracker, which would have associated the fix to the merge and the fix itself together.

I agree with this. This would make it immediately obvious that there were multiple fixes for one issue, which should be strange.

I also think there should be an overall review process where both:

1. Commits that have been chosen are reviewed by the group

2. Commits that have NOT been chosen should be reviewed by the submitters -- if there's something critical being left out, this is the time to speak up

They may already be doing something like this, for all I know, and there may be other reasons that this happened.

Additionally, I'm only coming to this conclusion because of the way it was presented in the article; the people involved may have a different view of why this happened entirely.

But for me, the way it was presented in the article, it definitely looks like a process failure.

That's great for sales for these people, but I think the real takeaway here is:

> when the actual merge of the tree was performed, no mention was made of [Linus's] correction to the [original] fix, and with no specific commit mentioning the correction and fixing it alone, everyone else's processes that depended on cherry-picking specific commits ended up grabbing the bad warning-inducing change. As a further failure, instead of looking at Linus' correct fix (observable by checking out the master tree at the time), the approach employed in the LTS kernels seems to have been to naively silence the warning

There are a LOT of process failures in this description of what happened. At the kernel development level, that should be very concerning.

It's good that an external auditor found it (hooray open source), but this was almost definitely an easily preventable mistake with a better process.

> everyone else's processes that depended on cherry-picking specific commits

This alone sounds horrifying.

I don't know anything about kernel development, so I don't want to sit here and judge and offer advice out of ignorance, but I really do feel like there's a better process that would work for them that doesn't involve people "cherry-picking specific commits."

Thank you for this! It was a really engrossing read.

> When he said “distal access,” he assumed that you, too, have structures on one side of your head representing what you know about, say, Neil Armstrong, and a smaller structure on the other side of your brain encoding the name “Neil Armstrong,” and cognitive mechanisms allowing you to fetch the former given the latter.

I thought this was an interesting example that glossed over some (to me) really interesting things in cross-contextual (usually cultural?) miscommunication. This assumption that the other person you're talking to has the same concept in mind for a word is at the root of all communication we do.

A simple example would just be UK to US English -- something as simple as "fanny," which has differing meanings to both populations.

For a non-geographical contextual gap, we can look at slang like "salty." a "salty meal," "salty boy," and "salty dog" are all completely different things.

Some of the biggest difficulties I run into with communication aren't with people who speak no English at all (I live in Japan), but people who speak English in a dialect(?) that's close to what I expect, but slightly different and used differently (e.g. as high context instead of low context). Sometimes I can be speaking with someone from India who has perfectly grammatically correct, fluent English, and suddenly be thrown for a loop when I realize that a word had a completely different meaning for both of us without either of us realizing it.

It's just a really interesting concept I think about a lot since I do a lot of cross-cultural communication.

The article also presents the number of elements in things as if that can show some kind of quantifiable change in a positive or negative way (for example, they call out the number of elements in a cell phone as having increased since the first cell phone).

I was hoping for something a bit more insightful about the design of the periodic table itself, whether about

1. Increasing order by atomic mass (and the ramifications thereof)

2. Arrangement of periods and the predictions we've been able to make/use

3. The groups of the table and the predictions we've been able to make/use, though I guess this is most common among the noble gases

4. Rare earth metals

And I'm sure there's a lot more I don't know -- every time I learn something about the periodic table, the more impressed I am by how orderly and patterned it is today despite having been initially designed (with gaps!) a century and a half ago.

The article could even have gone into how there are spoofs of the periodic table just because it's such a lasting, easily-understandable design.

I'm not a specialist, but the cheaper frames here tend to be plastic.

The more expensive frames are almost invariably metal, and then the special flexible plastic and titanium frames go for around 10,000+ JPY.

Normal lenses are cheap ("free" with frames), but if you go for fancy ones (bifocals, transitions, blue light filters, ultralights, etc.), the price goes up.

I've almost invariably bought the 4000-5000 JPY frames and they always look nice and function well.

In the US, however, Luxottica tends to control the frame production/pricing, so frame prices are really out of control. That's why other options like generic frames straight from China are much cheaper.

This is why I always advise glasses-wearing friends and families to buy glasses whenever they come visit Japan; prices are MUCH lower than in the US without the Luxottica tax.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear_of_missing_out

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11031-018-9683-...

https://time.com/4358140/overcome-fomo/

For a long time I thought "FOMO" was just a trendy bit of slang that hit the nail on the head nicely, but it's actually a documented psychological phenomenon (though I don't know which came first).

Ever since I learned about it, I've basically trained myself to not check social media often and, when I do, to remind myself that the pieces I see of other people's lives aren't representative of their lives as a whole, nor are they representative of what I should be expecting or enjoying from my own life. It's helped a little.

https://aws.amazon.com/jp/message/56489/

That's not what I got from this at all -- it sounds like the author of the review seriously detests the science fiction authors in the book and that that distaste carries over to the things they've written.

> . . . the study’s exposure of the selfish, banal, and prurient little world that his group of contributing personae, all of whom knew and socialized with one another, constituted. Nevala-Lee himself treats of that selfishness, banality, and prurience rather indifferently, as though it neither shocked nor repelled him. Perhaps the ambient moral relativism has inveigled his outlook.

That lack of objectivity makes me suspicious of the review more than anything -- not only does he dislike the subjects of the book, but he is willing to go the extra mile to make sure that he's loud about it.

Another example:

> Hubbard’s vulgarity and lewdness mark him as the most repugnant of Nevala-Lee’s cast of characters, but Asimov earns his place next to Hubbard in the repugnance category. Lascivious and self-licensing, he regularly mauled women and tried to seduce them. When science fiction conventions became a feature of the genre, Asimov would patrol the floor and greet strange women by fondling their breasts. . . . He was running his own sexual con-game.

Without bringing the truthfulness into question (I don't know either way), those are some serious claims and he's not at all making it clear whether this is from the book that he's reviewing or whether he's going off on his own with "everybody knows this" facts. Either way, he should be clear about that -- and if it's the latter, it really has no place in a book review unless to point out the omission, in which case he'd still need to be clear about the sourcing.

It sounds less like he's reviewing a book and more like he's taking the book to use as a soapbox to vent.

It's been a while for me, but do you mean By His Bootstraps or We're All Zombies? The latter, for anyone curious, has nothing to do with zombies.

Those two always fight for the top position in my head, so I'm curious if one of those is your top pick, or if you perhaps prefer another one. :)

I've noticed spillover effects into Japanese gamers as well -- people being suspicious of or derisive about mods, even when they're perfectly legal and the game has built-in mod support (looking at you Monster Hunter World).

My (Japanese) girlfriend is on the very conservative side of the spectrum there and absolutely hates it when I bring up any kind of modding, and so do her friends -- the culture of "authorial intent is king" is very strangely strong for a culture that also appreciates and enjoys doujin.

But! If someone from SE is reading this and it turns out that you just don't have a way to donate because it doesn't seem like people will donate, definitely put a paypal button or something out there. :)

This reminded me of The Motel of the Mysteries[1] where modern-day objects and franchises are similarly turned into temples and objects of worship or religious tools.

[1] https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Literature/MotelOfThe...

It's this kind of thing. It's literally a facial massage, not a translation issue.

They also provide various things like health, car, and automobile insurance.

So you'd really expect a conglomerate of this size to have financial things down.

What does "slap up" mean?

It could also be that Waterluvian had a low income and that affected his relationships.

Or it could be that it just differed in a direction (up or down) that his peers didn't expect or appreciate for whatever reason.

I can think of a lot of reasons revealing my income would affect various relationships I have (whether that's a good thing or a bad thing isn't relevant), even though I wish it wouldn't. Information about money does change the way people treat you.

When I was a kid, people knew my family wasn't doing so well and I'd get lots of well-intentioned charitable offers from friends and friends' parents that just made me feel really bad about myself, so there's one way that having a lower income revealed can affect relationships in an apparently positive way that's still uncomfortable.

This is the first I've heard of the RPi 4 not having PD -- could you point me to the specs you saw? I searched around a bit but couldn't find anything either way.