8,140 karma · joined July 2, 2010
Quality could be higher because ad reach was based in part on subscriber count, not just the attention-grabby-ness of particular headlines.
Suppose you live in the premium housing really close to the BART, so your walk is only five minutes to the station. Then another five getting through the fare gate and waiting for your train. Then your destination is an easy ten-minute walk from the BART. Great, but that's not a 30-minute trip, it's a 50-minute trip.
This is an empty mandate unless there is actually money to fund >= 1 shelter bed per homeless person.
This doesn't follow. It's incredibly efficient, in time and effort terms, to get around sprawl. You just drive at 65mph on the wide-open freeways and up the parking lot with plenty of open space in front of every conceivable destination. I've never spent more than 30 minutes making a point-to-point hop where both points are in sprawl. Average case, more like 10. Traffic jams == not sprawl-y enough.
Thirty minutes for any public transit trip in San Francisco or Chicago (at least the parts I can afford) is like a once-a-year pop-the-champagne-corks celebration. Ten, forget it. Not gonna happen ever unless it's the corner store. Getting anywhere useful is usually abut 50 minutes. (I'm pretty sure this is the CTA's SLA. No matter the distance - past a point, roughly 50 minutes. Implies some design effort and a sophisticated balancing of slower and faster lines).
Sure, bus tickets are cheaper than car ownership, but our time is worth something too.
>just agglomerations of many towns without a center
This is precisely what the pro-density anti-car people on HN advocate: dense walkable neighborhoods, with no real solution for medium distance transportation. Tiny markets where local businesses get to price-gouge you because going to a competitor means lighting your afternoon on fire.
For a very rough wedge, suppose there were some other activity which didn't have all the positive perceptions around running, which created painful and debilitating injuries requiring medical attention as a matter of course, whose participants could all expect to require specialized medical equipment to go about their lives for a period of weeks to months, several times in their careers in that activity. Imagine there were a whole cottage industry of doctors specialized in patching these people back up and sending them on their way to go get injured again, driving up insurance premiums for the rest of us in the process. Imagine that this activity, and this industry, primarily targeted children and adolescents.
We'd go apeshit. There would be immense moral panic.
A cross country runner at my high school was newly on crutches every other week, sometimes for the third time, and no one batted an eye. Orthopedic surgeons make their careers on relationships with the families of athletic teenagers, and no one bats an eye.
Coming from a background where painful, traumatic injuries are not just something that happens to everyone on a regular basis, statements like "I don't see any harm" are insane.
(Yes, I know it is possible to exercise in ways that mitigate this risk, and I do so. Still, if you really think about it, it's kind of crazy how much we tolerate sports injury).
Economists like to mention that just a few hundred years ago, an average worker's daily wages were only worth ten minutes of artificial light. Now they are worth more than 20,000 hours. This is progress. This is what we do.
Fuck the romanticization of poverty and hardship. That our children do not need to pour as much sweat as us into (literally) keeping the lights on is greatest joy of our success. That drive, grit, pain tolerance, and other survival-mode traits are no longer necessary or adaptive is the best thing that could be happening.
I suspect I will never be able to fully empathize with people who are sad about this. Different mindsets, I guess. Still, I think it's useful for us to be exposed to the opposing perspectives.
Yes. I recommend (and my employer uses) a Herald rule that admits pushes to master only if the changes are in an approved Diff (unit of code review). This way you get an enforced 2-man rule, but anyone besides the author can approve the change.
This is currently impossible with Gitlab AFAIK, and is the main reason I won't use it.
You can also configure Herald rules to add blocking reviewers to other people's Diffs based on arbitrary criteria (i.e. touches X file and it's a Tuesday). A Diff cannot be considered approved until all blocking reviewers have signed off.
Reviewers can also be groups, so you could say, for example, changes that touch Y file must be reviewed by Security, but any member of Security can sign off.
>Can I do a code review and then finalize it when I'm finished and does the author get notified with a summary like the new GitHub code review feature?
Yes, everything you do on a Diff is batched and happens all at once when you click "Submit" at the bottom. Inline comments, the free-form text box, and the action all come as one email.
> What I really like about the merge/pull request workflow of GitLab is, that multiple developers can work together on one feature branch while a merge request is open and can be used as a discussion platform for the changes - is this possible with Phabricator?
A Diff is really meant to be an individual's small, well-defined contribution. Multiple people submitting code to a one diff can get messy. This would be better modeled as many diffs.
You are allowed to land diffs against branches other than Master, however this gets messy. It is not a first-class use case. My employer does not collaborate on feature branches; instead we land half-finished features into master (and production) disabled by feature flags.
It is NOT a merge/pull-request workflow. It treats Git more like Subversion; Phabricator is a very sophisticated alternative to emailing patches around before SVN committing them (basically the equivalent of landing).
>Also I'm wondering how solid the issue tracking is, and if the project workboards can compete with Trello.
Issue tracking is totally solid, very configurable. Project workboards consist of tasks/issues, which are much more expensive to create than Trello cards: you fill out a pagelong form, pick type, severity, owning team, title, description, etc. vs just free-forming a title. However, you can drag tasks around the workboard just like Trello and it looks pretty similar.
>Can it be used by non-developers without giving them access to the code?
Yes. Permissions (and approval flows, and notification rules) are very configurable. Phabricator is well suited to a large organization with rules, but this suitability doesn't carry too much overheard.
I don't think you could collaborate on issues with customers. Nontechnical people in your company, though, totally - we do that.
>If things go south really really bad, we can just get the private key and sign certificates by hand.
Very clearly states that someone has access to the CA cert's private key outside the context of the automated signing service, and can use it to manually sign certs for users if the CA service is down. So the CA service can be bypassed if it goes down,.
A zero-privacy internet might be better than nothing, but I'm not 100% sure of that.
This is why we can't have nice things. I hope they find a way to defeat people doing this, but my guess is it would be prohibitively expensive (war driving entire cities, etc).
A CA is just some bytes, not a service. And it has been established that there's a backup login path: use (a copy of) the CA outside of the automated certificate signing service to manually sign the needed certificates.
They'd be screwed if they lost the CA's private key, but it is much easer to keep some data around than to keep a service functioning properly.
You don't have to use the integrated access point just because it's there.
Early 2000s were the worst years of VW in recent history. Things have vastly improved in Mk5, 6, and 7.
Only if you don't rent a nicer/closer apartment. (OTOH, lower commute times are associated with happiness).
Of course, actual physical badassery is carried out by special operations divisions of the armed forces - you get there by being a really good soldier, sailor, marine, or airman.
The intelligence services do just have regular job boards, college recruiting, etc. too. And then there's private intelligence firms, which have some overlap with journalism (i.e. Stratfor and Reuters both sell intelligence services in addition to their publications).
I think the actuary-types who design the scoring models would disagree vehemently with this one. Scoring models are built from regressions on actual default rates.
The most important thing about a government-level identity system is extreme difficulty of obtaining any identity other than the one you were born with. It seems inevitable in a web of trust that fraud rings would emerge to manufacture identities for those looking to escape debts, criminal convictions, etc by some combination of tricking and bribing people to sign authentications.
>You should be able to use any compatible product/software you like to sign orders to your bank with your private key
I'm not sure you should be able to use, say, a poorly written IE extension on your unpatched Windows XP machine. Something federated would be great, where any manufacturer can technically make something compatible, but it has to meet a FIPS standard or something.
Keys could be generated onboard, and then you upload your public key or something.
We're getting way ahead of ourselves - banks are extremely hesitant to use anything better than secret numbers. I'd rather a shitty 2FA implementation than that.
- Credit card utilization (balance as a percentage of available credit at last statement close)
- On-time payments (you just have to pay the minimum required by the date specified for it to count)
- Derogatory marks (collections, bankruptcies, foreclosures and liens)
- Average age of accounts (this favors older people who have been using credit a long time but not opening a lot of accounts recently)
- Total number of accounts (also rewards a mixture of types - car, student, credit card, mortgage, etc)
- Hard inquiries (very slightly dings your score if you're currently looking for credit, punishes you harder if you're desperately applying to everything you can find because this indicates financial emergency and therefore high risk).
https://www.creditkarma.com/article/credit-score-factors
If you use CreditKarma, it'll explain all this and how the values on your credit report fit in to the averages.
I did not have that, or any cosigned loan.
Fifty cryptographic APIs, on the other hand, would be a nightmare. We'd at least need the federal government to force states to implement one conforming to some open standard so that the integrations aren't intractable.
Some entities are incompetent at verifying identity because some people are very loud about making sure a a modern ID verification system doesn't get built, because the ability to commit fraud is a civil right or something.
We need .gov smartcards. Or at least a .gov OAuth provider. Instead we are in the dark ages of shared-secret numbers (SSN, credit card, etc) and scans/faxes of easily photoshopped printed cards.
There is an argument this should be a private responsibility. For interactions on an existing account, this makes some sense - banks should be shipping hardware tokens, for example.
The big issue with identity theft is criminals opening new accounts under other people's identities, and this is a serious problem because the government will enforce that debt against people who didn't actually incur it. IMO it is government's responsibility to demand better proof of authenticity before signing up to enforce it.
I felt pretty "trusted by definition." Citi gave me a credit card with a $3,000 limit as a college freshmen. A few years later I had an $8,000 limit card and a $10,000 limit card.
I bought my car certified-pre-owned under a program that writes favorable low-cost loans to recent college graduates with no or limited credit history (with an offer letter or paystubs).
You just aren't trusted with housing-sized amounts of money until you demonstrate responsibility with smaller dollar values first.
>basically creating debt and then paying it off
This depends on your definitions a little bit. You don't need to carry a balance and you certainly don't need to pay interest. You just need to create low but nonzero utilization on a credit card, pay it off every month, and not do anything else that might screw up your credit. I suppose you have debt in the interim between making the charge and paying it off, but most people don't consider it to be "credit card debt" if it goes away between statement cycles.
The WTC (like all modern high-rises in the developed world) had a pretty impressive set of firefighting and evacuation infrastructure, procedures, and personnel. This training video goes through it pretty well [0].
- Smoke detectors and pull stations everywhere to ensure any fire is detected and responded to quickly (i.e. before it gets out of hand). There was a fire station across the street.
- A huge console for responding firefighters to see the location of alarm conditions, make building or floor-wide announcements, and even have two-way conversations with intercom stations on particular floors.
- Sprinklers and redundant power for the pumps that run them.
- Fans to push smoke out of the building and supply clean air to evacuation routes.
- Fire stairs, kept closed under positive pressure to keep smoke out, kept unobstructed by regular patrols, encased in material that wouldn't burn through for hours.
- A network of piping and wall-mounted hoses easily fed from the dedicated fire-truck parking.
- Fire drills, designated authorities for the evacuation of each floor, security personnel trained to watch over the fire alarm equipment.
It's not like the WTC wasn't prepared to evacuate in a fire. It's just that nobody anticipated all that infrastructure (pipes, stairwells, etc) getting sheared through by an airplane.