SkeuomorphicBee

Nothing unfair about it, the truth is everyone got that question wrong (because there was no right option available), so they didn't fault the test takers, instead just annulled that one and scored everyone based on the actual questions, it is as fair as it can be.

It does suck for the people who though they had that one right, it is distressing to be shown one score and then later find out that the real score is lower. That should have been avoided by having an official recourse window before publishing scores, so when problematic questions are annulled then people only see their actual final score (in my country a recourse window is standard for all public exams).

That is not a fair way, for two reasons:

1. You can't award a bonus question to a subset of people, that is not a fair way of running a standardized test. You can't score some people as x/154 and some at x/153.

2. The old score was just plain wrong, so using it in any way is unfair.

The truth is no one got that question right because there was no right answer available. None of those available answers is "righter" than the other so it is not fair to assign a higher score to one of them like you proposed. Those people that got a higher old_score also got that question wrong, so their old_score is as wrong as any, and awarding them this unearned extra point would be unfair.

The only two fair options would be: to annul the whole test and make everyone retake; or the one taken where they annul that one question pretending it never existed and score based on the remaining questions (with each remaining question now being worth a fraction more). And this later option is in fact very fair, I don't think there is any real argument against this being fair.

It does suck that people were initially informed a wrong score and then later were disappointed with their real score. On this line I find it absurd that the SATs don't have the recourse period before they release the scores, and instead just releases the tentative scores as if they were real. This would all have been avoided if they heard the recourse and annulled the question before publishing results (as pretty much any serious exam around the world does it).

There is precedent that copying to another format for the original use is not copyright infringement. Like copying your old CDs to your phone to listen the go. So the IA should have a strong case that digital lending is such legit copying for the original use of lending.

This is a problem, out of band communication is always a second titer and always overlooked, always incomplete. We as developers see this every day with documentation running out of date in relation to code. The same way the out of group communication falls behind the primary channel.

That is quite an unetical move by Harvard, they are the ones that made the information public, and then punished those who viewed it.

I disagree, "w3" doesn't have any official connotation, it is literally the name of the thing they are teaching (or the alternate spelling of the abbreviation, but same thing). It is a common pattern for a school that teaches [thing] to call themselves "[thing] school", nothing wrong there.

Anyone knows a similar aggregated source for the opposite, for the good patterns?

Out of curiosity, are you sure about #1 ? I all because a long long time ago I worked with some raw NAND on embedded devices and I remember doing small writes, in fact I could do single byte writes (write only, the erase was in big blocks as you said).

Different strokes indeed. As a very happy apartment/flat/condo dweller, the suburban home life feels to me like being trapped in a tiny deserted island (the cartoon ones, with a single coconut tree), just a tiny personal plot surrounded by endless nothingness, with nowhere to go within reach. When in the suburbs I end up just staying in the couch all the time, because I can't be bothered to face the big journey necessary to go places, feels very isolating.

One small caveat: the "came out" date is irrelevant, the relevant date is the date an alternative appeared. In this case the real info is the replacement came out ~5 years ago (or ~4 depending on the definition).

And the situation is worse for AMD users, only 3 years since a compatible board came out.

Sacrificing customer comfort and customer goodwill is the new forefront of business optimization, and it is reaching levels where every interaction with every company always leave a bitter aftertaste for the customer. It all started with the famous tale of the airline that saved millions by giving passengers one less olive each, and it became a race to the bottom with companies continuously trying to find the crappiest experience that customers will still tolerate. The self checkout theft prevention measures are just the latest example, where they purposefully make the machines a bit hostile to everyone, making everyone's experience feel bit worse in order to prevent a percentage of thefts. It burns customer goodwill, but at the end of the day they decided that too much goodwill won't bring profit, so they might as well burn that goodwill to try and extract something from it.

> Like, using u8 or i32 instead of the standard uint8_t or int32_t might save a few keystrokes [...]

It is not about saving keystrokes, it is about reducing sensory load when reading it.

Sorry, I know it may sound like I'm splitting hairs, but every single time when the argument of verbosity vs conciseness in programing languages comes around, this "keystrokes" argument is thrown and it is extremely flawed. The core belief that conciseness is only better for faster typing but that verbosity is somehow always better than conciseness for reading is just plain wrong and we should stop using it. And yes, verbosity has some advantages for reading comprehension, but so does conciseness, no side is a clear winner, it is all about the different compromises.

> It has become a dominant view in the philosophy of time that Einstein’s Theory of Relativity showed that the passage of time is an illusion, and that in fact the past, present, and future all coexist.

The first paragraph is already troubling for me, the "fact the past, present, and future all coexist" is a gross misinterpretation of general relativity, a borderline esoteric atrology-type view, and I can't believe that such mistaken view grew to be the "dominant view in the philosophy".

I gather that everyone who actually knows their stuff consider the F35 very capable for its price, but still the number of reports of it crashing seems quite odd to my civilian ear, is this much crashing just normal for military equipment? As a comparison I searched for data on a civilian plane of roughly the same age:

- The F35, with ~965+ units made since 2006, had 12 incidents with 9 or 10 hull-losses

- The Boeing 787, with ~1,077 units made since 2007, had 7 incidents with 0 hull-losses

I know that military does more dangerous stuff that civilians (e.g. one of the F35 crashes was during aerial refueling, other one while landing in a carrier), but still a ~1% hull loss (without enemy fire) is surprising for me.

The sensor wouldn't wait for the whole travel and hit of the hammer, instead it would measure hammer position/velocity at all times and replicate that, so the latency could be fairly small, I would be curious if small enough for a musician.

In the article they mentioned "[...] activated by solenoids, a proven technology even used on some Spirio Steinways.". On Spirio Steinways's website they advertise a player piano model called Spirio [0], and in the description it they mention their capabilities as "[...] measure hammer velocity (up to 1020 dynamic levels at a rate of up to 800 samples per second) [...]", a sensor at 800Hz would mean a sensing delay of 1.25ms as a starting point. To that we would need to add the mechanical delay of the solenoid, unfortunately I couldn't find a source for how fast are solenoids (the fastest I found was a solenoid hydraulic valve fully closes in 13ms, but that is the full travel, I couldn't find info on response time for first movement), so I'll make an out-of-my-ass guess that a fast solenoid starts acting in two or three ms, then round up and estimate the total delay to 4ms.

So would my 4ms guess be too much for a musician? I don't know, not my fields, my guess (I've been doing that a lot today) is that if we are talking tempo it is probably too little to matter. So my only worry would be phase, if a musician's ear is sensible/trained enough to detect phase (I don't know if it is, probably isn't right?), then a 4ms delay would mean being in antiphase to the expected response at ~125Hz, that is the B2 key.

[0] https://br.steinway.com/pianos/steinway/todays-steinway/spir...

Just an interesting first person anecdote: In the south of Brazil (close to Argentina) we normally have well defined seasons, but almost like clockwork we always had a famous "mini-summer of May", an unusually warm week in an otherwise cold mid-autumn. Well in the last decade the new concepts of "mini-summer of June" and now "mini-summer of July" started entering the popular parlance, as this abnormally warm weeks during a cold season are becoming more numerous and coming later in the season (late Autumn and even Winter).

> Also, it's not the voltage that kills you, it's the amperage.

A bit off-topic but I never liked that saying, it is kind-of-right but also soo wrong in so many levels. Amperage is not a thing that happens on its own, it is always a result of voltage, voltage is the driving force, so it is the voltage that actively kills you, by forcing amperage through your internals. When the killing happens the voltage is the real murderer, the amperage is just the murder weapon.

I hate the prevailing sentiment around here that if you are not paying then you deserve all harm to comes to you. If I get free food sample from a brand I fully expect that it should comply with the same sanitary/health standards as a paid product, food makers can't just shrug a harmful contamination/spoiling in free samples and then just go "they are not paying so not my problem". We must hold free tech services to the same high standards.

Not to this specific case, it is not as you imply a case of a single person having a problem and not having timely support, it is a widespread problem or policy somewhere (purposeful or accidental) that collectively harmed many free-tier users.

> I hope this is not as bad in medicine and health related research.

I have friends and family working with medicine and health related research, and I don't think it is bad. In fact I'm a bit amazed at how good the Medicine academia is at science, and as comparison how bad computer-science (CSc) is at science.

With very few exceptions, CSc papers don't have any actual science, they don't have a hypothesis and a method to test it, instead most papers in CSc can be summarized as "I did this new thing and I find it cool", the peers simply don't expect you to do actual science. In comparison, in Medicine papers you are expected to follow the scientific method to a T, they have a hypothesis and test it (often heavily relying on statistics), and yes some Medicine papers are bad (with bad methodology, bad sampling, or bad statistics like p-hacking) but even the bad ones try (and fail) to follow the scientific method (or at least pretend to try in case of malicious papers), because the standard is that high.

A bit off-topic, but what's with all the 404 links in that about page? With all the missing pages it felt like a treasure hunt to find any information about what the language actually looks like. Literally the first four links in the About page are either broken or point to unrelated pages, so it took me five clicks to find the first example of the language.

Depending on the use case that is a big plus. E.G. My homeoffice desk has a hidden cable gutter in the back, to hide all the power and data cables, and I just leave all the power bricks there as well, so for me a small mini-pc on the desk with a power brick tucked away out of sight is much better than a bigger all-in-one.

That is even worse when you consider that tech brands often design their full lineups with the buying-power of rich countries in mind, their lowest option each year often being way too expensive to the lower classes on developing or poor countries, so there they often advertise previous years' models as the official budget option (often two, three or four years behind). As result that "2016" is more like 2018 in many countries, that is, someone may have walked into a reputable store, bought a "brand new" phone in 2018, and then it will be unable to access those websites just 5 years later.

I find it super interesting when a new efficient technique breaks into professional sports. As it is described in the article, there is always push back from the establishment, with even accusations that the new technique is cheating, then in some cases the rules are changed to ban the new technique and in some cases the technique makes its way into mainstream. Some interesting examples from the top of my head:

- V-style in ski jumping: when it appeared in professional ski jumping in the 80s it was considered inappropriate by judges, and athletes had to avoid it to not be penalized with low style points. But at some point in the 90s it became so much superior in distances achieved that athletes started winning with that even after penalties, so it became recognized as valid by judges and took over. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ski_jumping_techniques#V-style

- Fosbury flop in high jump: this one didn't receive much push back, it was kind of a Columbus egg, once Dick Fosbury won the gold in the 1968 Mexico Olympics, it spread quickly and in no time all major athletes were using the technique. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fosbury_flop

- front flip on long jump: this one was quickly banned from competition, due to safety concerns. It is theoretically more mechanically efficient and has potential to produce longer jumps, but since it was never allowed to be perfected in high level competition we will never know how far it could go. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_jump#Action_in_the_air_an...

- dunking free throws in basketball: this is other one that was quickly banned. Once a young Wilt Chamberlain demonstrated he could in fact dunk from behind the free throw line in a low league sort-of demonstration game, a rule banning it was created in the low leagues, and when Chamberlain made into the NBA the rule soon followed. https://www.sbnation.com/2022/3/26/22996516/wilt-chamberlain...

That is so interesting for amateur play, it will be a revolution for casual players with low grip strength. The way he performs the whole swing while holding the ball with the palm of both hands, instead of just gripping with your dominant hand's fingers, means he is using arm strength during the heaviest part of the swing. I mean, it is the full strength of both arms vs the grip strength of only one hand, it should be an order of magnitude difference, so weaker players will be able to focus more on technique instead of being 100% dedicated to just not dropping the ball mid swing.

Also 200mL, and if you go into older standards (sometimes needed to read a grandmother's cookbook) it could also mean 180mL, or 175ml.

I remember differently, I remember visual studio 6 bringing my PC to is knees (although to be fair I was a broke student and my PC was a potato).

I'll have to agree to disagree. In my experience IDEs are the one type of software that were always slow, Eclipse is two decades old, and it's slowness was on a whole different level.

> First, it's not always easy to map every object operation into either an open read or write.

Now a days people are mapping everything to JSON, and it works. The Plan9 directory structure was basically the JSON of the 80s, a hierarchical data structure were the hierarchy is easily navigable in a standard way, and the leafs can then hold any non-standard stuff you may need.

Mega was a re-thinked Megaupload trying to accomplish the same thing but they are very different as Mega is built with a different tech/business architecture to try avoid crossing the lines into illegality that Megaupload crossed.

The original Megaupload was built to take advantage of the market opportunity existing in the grey area between copyright infringement and personal sharing. They were not trying to make something illegal, instead they were trying to make something as close as possible to illegal while still being able to argue that they are technically legal, which they failed, as the powers-that-be decided that they crossed the line into illegality and persecuted them. After the failure of Megaupload they tried to do the same thing again with Mega, but armed with the new knowledge of what is now considered clearly illegal, what will get the persecutors knowing on your door, they redesigned the new product to not cross those new lines.

More specifically, Megaupload fell because it was provable that they knew about the individual instances of piracy, so they designed Mega around end-to-end encription, so Mega users can still pirate things but Mega can always claim ignorance as a defense. There was/is no difference in persecutor priority in regards to copyright (copyright infringement is still a top priority evil today), just a difference in what they can prove against those two different companies.

As an older programmer who deals with multiple languages, the very complexity of ASCII in a multi-language context does make unicode seems like a breath of fresh air.

Seriously, multi-language in the 90s was a hell of half-baked incomplete and incompatible solutions.