He inadvertently invented the Twitter mid-roll ad and we're all doomed now because of it
374 karma · joined November 20, 2018
String flossing has horrible UX. I started using floss picks like Plackers. It made it almost tolerable. Almost.
https://www.plackers.com/product-category/plackers-dental-fl...
I lived a few glorious weeks in bliss, thinking that regular string flossing was in my past.
To date it’s the most pleasing app to read markdown in, but I expect that vote will change once Bear releases their new editor (code name Panda), which looks gorgeous.
As Benedict Evans put it, when France fined Google for the same reasons:
> The shakedown continues. It’s hard to see how making tech companies pretend to ‘buy’ something that has little to no economic value to them is a path to a sustainable model for newspapers. If you want a tax and a subsidy, be honest and call it that.
https://twitter.com/benedictevans/status/1414856375348482050
My assumption is that levels plummet
These songs transcend what I'd consider mashups, it's like they treated all of their olds songs as samples, rebuilding entirely new songs out of them. It took some of the more obscure songs and made them "whole"; take Steam Machine, which in of itself wasn't that great of a song...a bit boring if you will. Combined with Too Long and it's now a song full of energy and tempo.
There are many others like it. What they mostly have in common is taking the best ingredients from the fringy Human After All and the glitzy Discovery, finding a very interesting common ground.
Is this a reflection on Apple's product strategy or that there are inequalities in the world?
FWIW, I love my Airpods Pro and it's insane that neither Sennheiser nor Bose could beat Apple to the punch with something that works as well as those do. That being said, my Airpods Pro aren't without issues: they seem to hate my iMac. Not even the Big Sur update could change my Airpods' aversion towards reliably connecting to it.
My Bose QC35s are almost 4 years old. My initial thought was to upgrade to the Bose 700 ($340), but the Airpods Max are $210 more expensive. If I assume 3 years before my next upgrade, this equates to $6 more per month.
The in-ear segment was a slam dunk for the AirPods Pro - no exciting options competing there (Sennheiser's True Wireless were a huge disappointment). In the wireless over-ear segment on the other hand, it is very competitive and there are great options. The H1 chip isn't that much of a leg up, compared to how well Sony, Bose and the others handle connectivity to multiple devices. It'll boil down to the basics for me: audio quality and noise cancellation - if Apple can nail those, the price increase would be worth it in my book.
More of a philosophical question, but from my POV if you're spending time implementing this, you're not valuing your time enough. For the creator (Fabio), it's arguably time well spent: define a problem, use your creative muscles to a functioning solution, document it and show the world your creation. All well and good.
Tinkering to implement Fabio's solution, now that's where I see it being low-value usage of your own time. There's an opportunity cost to it; you could be spending time finding your own problem and creating a solution you could display.
> The man in question is Tony Abbott, one of Australia’s many former Prime Ministers.
> For security reasons, we try to change our Prime Minister every six months, and to never use the same Prime Minister on multiple websites.
> Harold Holt was another former Prime Minster and we… lost him? He disappeared while going for a swim one morning. This is not a joke. We named Harold Holt Memorial Swim Centre after him. I repeat, this is not a joke.
1. Even if the end-medium is something else than a written document (presentation, video etc), you're still presenting your ideas from a->b->c, so the gaps are still there and aren't as apparent, but the recipients' brain still observe it.
2. If your writing goes unread, it can actually be a symptom of the lack of convincing presentation of the ideas. I spend probably 50% on the time on the introduction and it's what I write dead last. Another problem may be length: if it's too long it'll tire the reader (unless your writing is very good). Problem is that to write something compelling that is also short, is very very hard. I can bang out a 10-page document on a deadline in a day without much problem, but a 2-pager I'll have to spend much more time on.
Writing is very much a must-have, in the corporate or business environment especially.
Not talking about your style, prose or grammar, but how you structure the points you want to come across. It's not just useful in the context of "business writing", it's useful whenever you want something from someone else: to take an action of any kind.
I see it every week at work where people put a presentation together at first glance seems to be coherent, but if it had been written out as a document / memo, you'd easily see the gaps in their thinking. Forcing yourself to write out full sentences (not bullet points) into paragraphs and those paragraphs having a logical connection to each other, shines a spotlight on places where your thinking is weak or there are unfounded conclusions.
Here's the good news: there's one book that will teach you this thoroughly: Barbara Minto's - "The Pyramid Principle: Logic in Writing and Thinking". Bad news: the book is out of print, since the author wants people to either buy her courses or her updated textbook which she charges $150 for (not a typo): http://www.barbaraminto.com/textbook.html
The book is insanely useful, so find a used copy of the 1987 or 2002 edition in a used bookstore.
The difference is in how your individual notes are structured into a coherent system. Instead of filing a note in your cabinet by topic / theme, you give each note a unique ID number and over time add links to others within your note.
I think his argument still holds: experts having made mistakes doesn't change the fact that you are unlikely to be able to evaluate based on merits in the first place. Unless you are an expert in the field, you're highly unlikely to know enough about the other research out there which is valid, applicable and could contradict the findings; you're not capable of proper evaluation.