acomar

I've been hearing about the coil whine for ages, but I've never heard it over multiple 9550s and a 9360. I'm even in an office right now surrounded by the 9550s which were supposed to be plagued by the issue. Is it that the whine is occurring at a frequency I can't hear?

This makes no sense. The administration has made a martyr of someone who the general public had never heard of. She was due to resign in a few days in any case. Side-lining her for those few days would have been the smart move politically and instead they've guaranteed a news cycle during which his administration will be compared to Nixon. CNN is already calling this the Monday Night Massacre. In what light does this make sense as anything other than an unbelievably thin skin?

Sure, but I don't know any pure languages that provide no facilities for mutation whatsoever, they just ask you to be explicit about it and add some syntactic weight (which is a good thing, you want mutation called out as a reader). Haskell provides several different mutation options from simple references to various kinds of thread-safe references depending on what semantics you need. There's even a "no-really-trust-me" option.

So where does the myth that you can't exit out of immutability come from?

I've found the specific sites you have open matter too. Google products (inbox especially) and AWS in particular are awful if you leave them open for a while. I stopped doing that as soon as I noticed.

On linux I also saw a lot of benefit to making sure hardware acceleration was force enabled (it's disabled on the platform by default for some reason; I also had to start optirun-ing it on my laptop). Firefox has literally never been faster or behaved better since making those two changes.

It's always either redundant or indicative of a problem elsewhere. Either section 1 has a title/thesis that makes it obvious what it's about and so the restatement is unnecessary, or you need to say it because you haven't already made it obvious. Instead of saying "This is the aim of section 1", just make the point of the section apparent.

This is a class of stylistic issue that's common in professional writing by those new to it and usually stems from a lack of confidence in the topic or in one's self.

There's a difference. You aren't forbidden from listing your marital or child-care status on your resume, companies are forbidden from asking you about it. Banning applicants from disclosing their school would be a rather different step.

I bet you'd be on the hook for installing a door without locks though.

The lanes are HOV-3 if you have an appropriately equipped transponder to signal that fact.

It's unpredictable in the sense that even with a compile-time check that the function I'm calling is pure, I don't have any guarantee that it won't throw on my particular inputs.

This comes up a lot in the Haskell community -- code outside IO is guaranteed by the compiler to be pure, but you can still get hit with an asynchronous exception because you called a partial function.

> Unpredictable exception-throwing only happens if the work being done by your function isn't pure, i.e. it depends on something other than the function parameters.

This isn't true. The canonical example is trying to grab the first element of an empty list. You either check and catch the error or eat the exceptional behavior, but some pure functions are just partial and aren't defined for all inputs.

(Whether or not they throw a catch-able exception depends on language/implementation and is really not relevant to my point.)

You know what's funny about that quote? It was actually intended as a clever dig about Robert Hooke's height[0]. Newton and Hooke had a longstanding feud and this was another shot in that war. The quote itself is much older with the oldest known attribution from John of Salisbury, but it's possibly older still.

[0] http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/history/q0162b.shtml

I must be missing something. I realize the stories share some similarities but the third movie ends with a Hindu prayer to drive the point home: the Matrix is a fairly classic retelling of the story of Gautama (the Buddha). It follows the Hindu tradition of the story but it's definitely Gautama.

Thanks!

This has me down a rabbit-hole because I'm now trying to find the name for a related concept: once you've learned a new idea/model, you start to notice how it applies to everything around you. I find this happening most often with algebraic ideas but the article you linked alludes to the fact that you're liable to notice this effect at play more in the days after reading about it. I want to call it overfitting but that's not quite right.

I do too.

I suspect they're a form of confirmation bias, however, because it's not easy to remember that you heard about an idea or term you're unfamiliar with. On the other hand, something you've just recently heard or learned stands out: it reinforces the lesson you've just learned.

Presumably they'll want to deactivate the accounts for people who don't settle their bills, and they'll want to keep out folks who don't have accounts. This seems attackable to me, probably because they haven't released enough details about how it works.

I saw that, but it sounds vague enough that there a few different scenarios I can think of to attack this service. Like what are they going to do if multiple people are sharing an account, but they only have photos of one?

edit: I just realized how they can deal with that -- take a picture when the person walks in and tie it to the account they scanned. There still seem to be a bunch of fraud issues, but this is certainly interesting.

I wonder how they plan to deal with fraud... some kind of check-in process instead?

PD is bad enough on its own without dementia. My mother has had the early onset variety since her mid-thirties, and while her cognitive function has clearly declined, she's no where near dementia. On its own, the disease is like prison. You slowly become trapped in your own body and lose the ability to have an impact on the world around you. The treatments and medication cause diskinesia (the violent/uncontrollable tremors associated with the disease) and the wrong dose (for that day/time), or the wrong setting on the implant they put into the motor cortex to stimulate it, is as bad as no treatment at all. Depression is a common co-morbidity.

Parkinsonism is watching yourself die with full knowledge of what's happening to you and a complete inability to do anything about it. My mother had polio as a child as well, so she's trying to learn to walk for the third time.

There is no fate I find more horrifying on a personal level. None.

I'm not saying there's no lock-in, just that it's not as rigid or strong. Better search results (for you) is exactly the kind of reason you want to be using one search engine over another. If another search engine started providing better results, you'd be able to swap, and the only effect would be the psychological disorientation from the change interface (I struggle to use DuckDuckGo because my eyes scan the wrong part of the screen while trying to take in the results).

The account would be by far the hardest thing for me to walk away from. Email is federated and I can export the mail out of Gmail without too much hassle. I don't because I like the interface they provide (for now). Calendar, same deal. I'm there for the convenience, not because another calendar application wouldn't work for me.

Accounts would be the hard part because that's my phone login, and there's no standard account service I could migrate to that would give me a functional replacement.

The real thing keeping me on the Google platform is the convenience of having these things tied together. But that's not exactly a strong lock for me. I can and do hop services while sacrificing convenience. This might be a stronger hold on others but it's still not Microsoft's you-can't-do-work-in-any-organization level of hold between Office, Windows, Exchange, etc..

Wait, KeePass only decrypts the database into memory for a particular process, right? So it would take an exploit of some kind to read the memory holding the decrypted database?

There's less of a lock-in effect though. The only thing stopping you from using a different search engine is that you're more comfortable with Google, it provides better (catered to you) results, etc.. That is, competitive advantage.

When people leave Google Search (and they will, nothing lasts forever), they'll leave fast.

Works fine in Firefox.

They hit the self-destruct button. It's reasonable to expect that it's all gone at this point. The community will have to build something new and hopefully more resilient this time.

That's true only of the most popular OSS projects but the infrastructure described in the OP is much more general about that. I strongly recommend actually reading the full paper, it talks about the difficulty in funding these projects because of it's highly distributed nature.

Donated to whom? There's no central body to receive and distribute these donations. Somebody still has to turn the indirect funding into direct funding to actually get the money into the hands of the developers building the infrastructure; your 'waste' and corruption are just moving out of the government and into whatever body you designate.

This model just doesn't work and that's exactly what the paper linked in the OP is about. Look at OpenSSL, everyone was (is) using it, one guy was maintaining it and barely earning a salary to do so.

Seriously, read the OP, it's well worth your time and makes an extremely solid case. It's both well-researched and well-written.

If you slow it down, it would be apparent to you too. High-level human players do this kind of thing to, just not this fast. But effectively, it's watching where the attacking unit is facing and it knows when the next attack is coming, so it knows what the viable targets are and can react when it becomes obvious.

(it's also possible the system is receiving information directly from the game engine, but it's definitely possible to figure this out from nothing but the information on screen)

GPL just requires source to be available to anyone who receives the binary. It has to be available on request. You can ask them to pay for the cost of postage to ship it to them.

> Meanwhile, our "software patterns" embed a centralized power structure both in the code (architect->team lead->junior programmer) and in the world now increasingly controlled by the whims of Silicon Valley founders.

None of these things is obvious to me. In fact, this whole paragraph veers in the direction of a conspiracy theory. The rest of your post is quite interesting and I agree that the design of our software should tend towards the human and humane.

> Exactly the opposite is true of our usual application of "software patterns". They are often used to produce software that is inherently immoral. Alexander's patterns describe an environment of decentralization of decision-making about both architecture and the community it inhabits.

You should expand on this.