BjoernKW

Back in 1997, with my first business, which was about hosting and - occasionally designing - websites for companies.

Hedonism is a philosophy.

"Top Boy" qualifies as well in that respect (a new, and quite likely final, season has just been released). While not exactly as well-known as "Breaking Bad", it not only offers an insightful perspective on the drug trade itself but also on a specific London subculture.

Fundamentally, that show is about business and entrepreneurship. Sure, the industry might seem more than just a little shady and its methods often are ruthless, but basic business principles still apply (to quote one of the main characters: "Buy cheap, sell dear.").

Ah, the true mother of all leaky abstractions:

The actual underlying transmission protocol of the relativistic universe shining through when trying to send an email.

The "The Ecology of Dune" (fictionally by Pardot Kynes, the first planetary ecologist on Arrakis) appendix in the first Dune novel is about this subject: Life is its own tool to ever more efficiently extract energy from a system.

Even though most people here probably understand what you are referring to by "ClosedAI" I think that trying to coin neologisms or new designations for existing entities with the intent of conveying a specific opinion or agenda ultimately isn't helpful.

It can serve a purpose as an ironic figure of speech, but attempting to redefine the entire meaning of an entity or concept by stubbornly referring to it by a different name (e.g., consistently using "service as a software substitute" for the SaaS acronym) seems petty and doesn't add anything beyond the original argument.

What I find increasingly annoying is third parties (i.e. those whose primary service isn't to provide authentication or MFA, specifically) trying to route me through their mobile apps for a second factor.

For example, GitHub and Google (via their Gmail mobile app) are constantly nagging me to open their apps for certain actions such as modifying security settings on a GitHub repository or even just logging in to Google Workspace.

While certainly more secure than SMS, I'd like to use an authenticator app of my own choosing for that process (e.g., 1Password or Authy). While that's still possible, UX-wise that requires an additional step and possibly also brings about the risk of being flagged by some internal fraud detection system.

To me, this feels like they're trying to promote their apps and increase user retention and interaction by means of what superficially looks like a beneficial security feature.

1Password, in terms of both UX and security expertise and track record. They provide mobile apps with a decent UX that makes use of device capabilities (e.g., biometric authentication) where appropriate, too.

Basically, people from all walks of life, which is one of Freemasonry's benefits: It allows you to meet people you wouldn't otherwise have met and get to know their perspectives and points of view.

That said, since its self-proclaimed purpose is to make good people better and a Mason should attempt to become better version of themselves, you'll most likely find people who seek purpose and self-improvement beyond shallow self-optimization (honing your skills is very much encouraged, too, though).

Just google the lodge meeting there, go to their website and send them an email.

Contrary to common perception, Freemasonry isn't a secret - or secretive - society. Usually, they'll be happy to oblige.

At 80/100, my WordPress-powered website does pretty well: https://pagespeed.web.dev/analysis/https-bjoernkw-com/dbmpsi...

Locally, using Lighthouse, I even get 98/100.

Thermodynamically, nothing will work indefinitely.

For all practical intents and purposes, the finite resources available on this planet and in the universe are more than sufficient, though.

Don't overthink it. HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and Bootstrap for consistent look-and-feel and theming.

If it's not an app itself, you probably don't need a framework such as React for a website and you don't need to precompile and bundle CSS either for most simple website use cases.

> British people will also tell you they have good food

If you've ever eaten Indian curry (of the tikka masala variety in particular), chances are, its recipe was British in origin.

While traditional British food might not appear particularly appealing to the discerning palate, Great Britain is home to many a culinary innovation.

Thank you for most entitled comment in this thread so far.

People in developing or newly industrialized countries typically don't drive SUVs or live in individual houses with HVAC.

This idea that we could solve the climate change problem entirely by restricting the amount of energy people are allowed to consume in the Western world is a misguided and quaintly privileged point of view.

For most of the rest of the world limiting growth would come down to population control and demanding people remain in abject poverty.

More people require more food and more energy, both of which need to be produced, This can only happen through economic growth and efficiency gains.

These are a few of my previous comments on the matter:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35357326 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35362526

> The United States does not do anything other than what serves it's own interests.

No country does. Countries don't have morals, countries have interests.

Actions by countries are of course almost always justified based on the former, rather than the latter.

I suppose, the parent comment was referring the Three Virtues of a great programmer: https://thethreevirtues.com/

Bad communication isn't one of those (although, given the prevalence of bad communication in the industry, one might assume it is ...).

> And I thought javascript was inefficient compared to C.

JavaScript (and web-age scripting languages in general) made programming more accessible in a fashion perhaps not entirely dissimilar to what we'll see with generative AI.

When did people stop working during Covid (unless you equate "work" with "commuting to an office to sit in front of a screen all day while you could have done just the same from home or your own office")?

It's a well-known problem, for which unfortunately there doesn't appear to be a reliable, one-size-fits-all solution, though, see (including lots of suggestions for potential fixes):

https://talk.macpowerusers.com/t/16-macbook-pro-gets-excessi...

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/2019-16-is-hot-noisy-wi...

https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/f10ip5/how_to_fix_16...

The culprit is the Radeon High Side GPU power consumption rising to 20W when connecting to an external display.

For some configurations, customising the screen refresh rate (using SwitchResX) seems to work, for others it's connecting the external monitor to another port (and / or not charging via the same port), while yet for others none of those suggestions seems to work.

Liquid Democracy is an interesting idea in that regard:

https://liqd.net/en/software/, https://github.com/liqd

Unfortunately, it doesn't have a lot of traction (used to have a bit more during the Pirate Party's heyday).

In more pragmatic, more immediate terms, His Majesty's Government (or rather: the Cabinet Office, specifically) is quite active when it comes to providing open source software that helps with governance (e.g., through data science and design systems). You might be able to find something worthwhile there to contribute to:

https://github.com/orgs/alphagov/repositories

> If you have a reason, and tell your users, there’s nothing wrong with it.

That's still for the courts to decide. Specifically, the German federal court for example didn't define what constitutes a legitimate reason for storing IP addresses.

This is precisely the problem with GPDR: While maybe well-intentioned, that regulation has been kept intentionally vague, which has local authorities interpret the rules how they see fit (or how it suits their purpose), since there's no clearly defined ruleset to depend upon.

> "for security or other purposes"

"other purposes" is about as vague as it gets. According to GDPR, a legitimate interest has to be specific and the specific reason that constitutes such an interest has to be communicated to the user.

This is not surprising at all. The EU itself is hilariously non-compliant with GDPR. After all, why would they comply with GDPR? Public authorities are largely exempt from GDPR anyway.

> While it's important to protect individual right to privacy, it's also very important for the EU to make entrepreneurship as approachable as possible to truly boost economic growth.

I'm sorry to break it to you, but the EU doesn't care about entrepreneurship and small businesses. Anything EU politicians and representatives like to say to the contrary is mere lip service. By and large, the EU is an environment that's hostile towards entrepreneurship.

> The GDPR basically boils down to “guard your user’s data, keep only what you need, and tell them what you do with it”.

That's how GDPR is commonly advertised, but for those who actually have to implement it, i.e. small to medium-sized businesses (large companies basically go scot-free, because a. they can afford legal departments to deal with GDPR how they see fit and b. local authorities can't be arsed to investigate the privacy violations routinely committed by companies such as Facebook or Google), the picture is much more complex, to the extent GDPR becomes an existential risk even to ordinary businesses that don't do anything unexpected or untoward with their users' data, for instance:

- In certain larger EU countries you're not even allowed to record a website visitor's IP address (because some court has decided those count as PII) and consequently have to jump through a ridiculous amount of hoops to make sure it isn't.

- You have to make sure that any service provider you're working with complies with GDPR.

- Currently, due to an ECJ case ruling informally known as Schrems II (https://www.gdprsummary.com/schrems-ii/ ), you're not allowed to store any user data with a company affiliated with a US company in any way, which boils down to virtually every business and the economy as whole being in violation of GDPR.

Now, it's often argued that the EU and GDPR aren't to blame for this because it's the US CLOUD Act that created this issue. Technically, this is true and the CLOUD Act indeed is hugely problematic, to say the least.

However, the problem remains and it's on the EU to negotiate an agreement with the US that allows companies to legally do business in the real world (as opposed to an ideal world according to GDPR) again.

I find it amusing when pro-wrestling gets compared with MMA - or any other combat / fighting sport, for that matter. I appreciate both, but they're entirely different beasts and should be judged based on their own merits.

I by the way consider it no less funny when people pretend or assume MMA to be tantamount to - or at least a close approximation of - self-defence situations. MMA is still a sport with rules, which has very little in common with a non-consensual fight.

> Could it maybe work the other way, start to make the WWE more real?

They actually tried that in the 90s. Turns out, having performers compete who are used to making a fight with a scripted outcome look real - rather than win an open-ended fight - is a terrible idea.

While there certainly are pro-wrestlers who could legitimately win a real fight (the name Haku coming to mind; according to reports that a guy was a certified bad-ass you wouldn't have wanted to mess with), most of them likely don't really know how to block non-scripted jabs or strikes, which led to serious injuries during that event.

> Scripted but very real in most ways.

Different era, but back in the 90s, guys like Ric Flair or Mick Foley were almost superhuman in terms of stamina or the bumps they were able to take and still continue.

> Degrowth is about structuring the economy to meet the needs of humans instead of the needs of spreadsheets.

What does that mean exactly? How is the economy to be structured to meet human needs according to Degrowth and who gets to define what those needs are?

The Degrowth movement - and I'm merely paraphrasing from the Wikipedia article here - rejects the idea of economic growth. Without economic growth either the number of human beings has to remain stagnant (at best; more likely that number would have to be reduced to make such a system sustainable) or the overall standard of living would have to be lowered.

Merely redistributing wealth doesn't cut it either, because without growth there can be no further creation of wealth. Hence, such a redistribution would be a one-off event and at least in the long run most people would still be worse off than with economic growth.

The fallacy of Degrowth and similar Malthusian ideas (such as the Club of Rome's similarly named "Limits to Growth") is to assume that growth is a zero-sum game, in which inevitable someone - or society (or the environment) - has to lose for somebody else to win.

While thermodynamically the resources on planet Earth - and ultimately the universe - of course are finite, for all pragmatic intents and purposes they are not.

Given continued technological progress and ensuing paradigm shifts, it is entirely possible to sustainably live on this planet under the premise of both economic and population growth as history since the time of Thomas Malthus himself has proven time and again.