Qub3d

Absolutely! Another couple of grocery shopping tips (from Michael Pollan):

- The Grandmother (or Great-Grandmother) test: don't buy food unless your Great-Grandmother would recognize it. I expand this to a generic hypothetical ancestor from anywhere in the world, as my Great Grandma wouldn't recognize, say, Gochujang sauce, but the idea is simple -- stick to food that has been around for a while.

- Stick to the outside "perimeter" of a grocery store for the most part. This is not a hard and fast rule, but generally the fresh and whole food will be on the walls around the grocery section, with more processed foods in the aisles.

> Just don't buy rich foods over which you have no willpower.

I started working with a dietician recently (which has benefits, but is not at all necessary) and they phrased is as, "its easier to practice willpower for 30 minutes once a week at the grocery store than every hour of the day the food is in the house."

Absolutely!

It wouldn't be easy, and would need some adjustments for colorspace etc but this is a method I have seen discussed online before.

The speaker part is much easier. At some point in almost all modern audio systems, there will be a PCM signal as part of the DAC step. Hook in here, pipe that signal to a computer's audio in / microphone port, and you've got a pretty clean audio stream.

Really great read, I found it very engaging! It does a great job balancing introducing concepts and teasing more advanced stuff for anyone who wants to explore further.

I wish I had this text when I took my intro to computer hardware course!

I found one or two copy editing errors (missing words, a broken link) but those are easily fixed and I'll make an issue for them.

Great work overall.

The problem is that results in some users with privileged knowledge and other users without. The OP has been using language like "they" to refer to editors as some unified, privileged bloc but that is incorrect, and part of the issue. (If they have found some specific users to be "gatekeeping" content, that is a problem and there exist mechanisms to redress that[0].)

Ultimately, if the OP wants "the editors" to see information to add to the article, they will effectively be publishing the information publicly, since anyone can be an editor, and there is no mechanism for protected sources that are available to only some special cadre.

That breaks the Wikipedia model -- in article namespace, everyone should be able to review the same source information. The concept here is called "verifiability" for a reason. Wikipedia's strength is that you can ultimately go check and confirm the source.

By writing articles from privileged information, Wikipedia effectively becomes a primary source on a subject, which is a big no-no for an encyclopedia in general, and for Wikipedia specifically: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research

It can be frustrating, but it is a necessary minimum. As to perceived accuracy, Wikipedia has a General Disclaimer[1] for a reason.

If this all makes you less trustful of Wikipedia... good! I can't speak for every wikipedian, but I personally welcome skepticism and encourage users to verify anything they have doubts on.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer

Yikes! I would sort of wonder if it was a test to see if you know scope. But for two hours?

I know its Apple but I'd definitely be prepared to walk out. In that situation that gives you the freedom to clarify the job description -- if they say it is in the description, I'd save everyone time and say I don't have that knowledge, thank them for their time, and wish them luck on their next n months of searching for their unicorn.

If it isn't, I'd probably go full stick-in-the-mud and explain that I could find the answers to those questions but it would be a waste of everyone's time: I'm an A player and I don't focus on irrelevant things that dilute abilities and ultimately the product (basically throw Steve Jobs at them).

I imagine they're complaining about the technical interview. For the record, when I did the technical interview I didn't find it too onerous -- mostly a more advanced sort of FizzBuzz to check you could do some intermediate math and handle basic data structures and logic flow.

My understanding is that at Apple this can vary quite a lot in difficulty or depth depending on what team you're looking at, and who is interviewing you.

ReactOS isn't necessarily the best example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20341933

One of the ultimate plaintext champions is (unsurprisingly) John Gruber, the "inventor" of Markdown.

One of my favorite facts about his site, daringfireball.com: You can add the extension .text to any permalink and it will render that page as markdown:

- HTML: https://daringfireball.net/linked/2022/03/01/mozilla-on-tind...

- Markdown: https://daringfireball.net/linked/2022/03/01/mozilla-on-tind...

As noted in the repo README:

> One could do this with GNU sed, but developers working in proprietary operating systems don't have GNU sed.

Good Twitter thread about the leak (nitter instance): http://twtr.domain.glass/RidT/status/1498692537741025284

I hope none of them plan on accepting cups of tea in the near future[0].

[0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Alexander_Litvine...

Uh-huh, ask the Sailors of Kronstadt how that went: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kronstadt_rebellion#Aftermath

And I'm about to get shot by dog with a handgun[0]. Of course nuclear is a concern to be aware of -- but that is why NATO et. al. aren't responding with boots on the ground. In our current situation, where that has been unequivocally ruled out by the NATO leadership, the risk is still tiny, and we have plenty of other more pressing systemic risks to deal with first.

[0]:https://xkcd.com/1252/

I use vanced, and I have YouTube premium. Sponsor segments and missing dislike counts are killer to my experience. I also like that I can turn off elements of the YouTube design that are clearly rushed and/or TikTok also-rans demanded by management.

For the record, I support the informal system used for paywalls: Its allowed if there is a viewable alternative (archive.is or another news site).

In the case of twitter, we have https://threadreaderapp.com (used to also have threader.app but they got ACK!-quihired by Twitter)

To illustrate the above point (a little hyperbolically) https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...

Vivaldi is a chromium-based browser, so it comes with the pros and cons of that. Pro being that it (currently) supports ublock... we will see if they decide to adopt manifest v3 or not.

A bit of realpolitik on my part, I'm afraid. I think even my suggestion would be a challenge to get passed in any state, let alone federally.

Seriously. I believe victims of civil forfeiture should be given their money back + an amount equal to, say, the average stock market returns over the period it was gone (or at least a base 4-5%) as reimbursement of the opportunity cost and as a deterrence against frivolous seizure.

I think part of it is also an implementation pressure. If you put your dev work into building a system around managing subscriptions and processing user payments, its less easy to flip a switch and start siphoning data to 3rd-parties when they come calling.

In theory, this would be visible to end-users as a halt in feature roll-outs, because the dev team has to pivot to building ad-tech.

I hope to god VCs don't get involved; if they do I'd be the first to bail. I'm hoping that the revenue model makes VC money allergic to them in general. Bootstrapping is preferred for this type of service (see also: Pinboard, sr.ht)

Kagi ultimately will be a paid service. As I've noted in the context of other services (email), by providing revenue in the form of paid services (and only paid, no freemium tier) the service doesn't have to implement ads at all, and thus can skip the pressure to deliver more and more data in exhange for better rates.

I'm confused then, are you in support of cryptocurrency? Because what you're describing (the "system") sounds an awful lot like reinventing banks from first principles but much less efficiently. If that is how it's intended to function then why are we bothering with this at all?

And aside from KYC issues, another recently posted article pointed out that when a single individual tried to unload around a 1500 BTC (%0.03 of the coins in circulation at the time) it caused a liquidity crisis that crashed the market by 20%.[1]

In this case the individual in the Twitter thread has an amount of ETH of that magnitude.

Basically because crypto is performing the job of a speculative asset it results in the liquidity issues that you would see in things like company stock.

[1]: https://blog.dshr.org/2022/02/ee380-talk.html?m=1 (see footnote 11. The gist is that this sale put enough pressure on the order books that a lot of leverage positions cascaded into selling as well causing the flash crash)

It's certainly under the category of base rate bias but it's a specific subcategory (think of it as the rhombuses and squares relationship). In this case the term is used to focus on the fact that it's not just one example here (or two or three), you can provide thousands of examples of currency fraud and the fallacy is still a fallacy

> Most people think of stereotyping as “Here’s one example I heard of where the out-group does something bad,” and then you correct it with “But we can’t generalize about an entire group just from one example!” It’s less obvious that you may be able to provide literally one million examples of your false stereotype and still have it be a false stereotype.

Counter-point: there is currently another submission on HN suggesting that crypto "off-ramps" are really problematic and difficult at the moment.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30322296

Well, yes and no. They are clearly all-in on crypto (and who wouldn't be, if I made 100 million on tulip bulbs I'd probably be all-in on tulips, too) but they do state in the featured thread that they "aren't really an NFT guy".

Certainly not a great look to have >$100 million in an asset sitting in a single account of any form, though.

To restate what the twitter user was saying: "It seemed like this was a get-rick-quick scheme, but this person could be useful to my goals, so I decided to overlook that"

I guess you can argue that get-rick-quick does not necessarily imply scam, but it certainly reflects poorly on a person to ignore their doubts because the source of the doubts is useful. Its not a unique problem to NFTs, its a similar problem that a founder might face when, say, entertaining an acquisition by Meta.

See also: the "Chinese Robbers" fallacy[1] -- just because you can find a ton of examples of fiat fraud, doesn't imply its worse -- without context it only implies its the most common form of currency.

[1]:https://www.lesswrong.com/s/XsMTxdQ6fprAQMoKi/p/DSzpr8Y9299j...

If the last lottery ticket winner hadn't bought a powerball ticket, they also wouldn't be worth millions.

Beware the survivorship bias: https://xkcd.com/1827/