byset

From that link, it seems like the change in the text column width behavior, which is promoted as limiting text columns to a maximum width, in practice creates a min-width as well which can be quite wide. That is, in the old wikipedia, you can adjust the browser window to make the text column arbitrarily narrow, but in the new wikipedia — depending on other elements on the screen — in practice can you from having an uncomfortably wide column of text that you can't adjust to be any narrower.

So it seems like kind of a mixed bag readability-wise.

edit: For example, this article's main text area seems to have a width of around 155 characters, while typography rules of thumb dictate not exceeding 75 or so:

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsgau_Wartheland

With her doubtful record of success, it is questionable that the CEO really could find a higher paying job elsewhere.

And Mozilla's poor track record suggests that if Mozilla insists on paying the same CEO salary, they might do well to find a different CEO to give it to.

I think the point is less that this CEO should take a pay cut — although she probably should — but more that the mediocrity + layoffs + exorbitant-CEO-salary situation here reeks of self-dealing.

Well, the official press release is titled "SiFive To Introduce New RISC-V Processor Architecture and RISC-V PC at Linley Fall Virtual Processor Conference", so that does suggest some sort of PC-like product.

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20200914005108/en/SiF...

Note that the article doesn't say whether this "PC" will be an actual product that SiFive sells.

Interesting that the group behind this is Tsinghua-Berkeley Shenzhen Institute, which is sponsored by UC Berkeley as well as a major Chinese university and the Shenzhen government.

China is quite interested in RISC-V gaining traction as trade and security barriers rise and they work to build up their domestic technology sector.

Going into wild-ass speculation mode, if this board really is affordable, I wonder if it's being subsidized by the Chinese gov't to encourage RISC-V adoption.

If I understand correctly, it's hard to make a cheap RISC-V Linux board with a price in the same order of magnitude as Raspberry Pi, because the Pi benefits from the availability of cheap, powerful ARM-based CPUs that were mass-produced for the mobile phone market. Linux-capable RISC-V parts have nowhere near these economies of scale.

Per Reuters, investors include Saudi Aramco, SK Hynix, and previous investors including Qualcomm, Intel, Western Digital, and Sutter Hill Ventures

Sure, there will always be customers for whom the low-price option is perfect.

Outlet malls are another form of price discrimination, as they offer lower prices for those willing to travel further to get the lower prices. But there will always be some people happen to live next to the outlet mall.

To add to that, it allows them to advertise that "prices start at..." and give an unrealistically low price, which is manipulative, to be sure.

As I see it it's basically price discrimination.

Apple wants a certain profit margin for the model as a whole. Yet for customers who will never pay prices that will give Apple that full margin, they offer a model at a low price point with a compressed margin, but with a painful aspect that will encourage customers who can pay to go with a higher priced unit — here, the painful thing is the small SSD size.

So the idea that the minimal-SSD model is somehow the "real" price and Apple is selling SSD space at an exorbitant markup, isn't quite right.

You could almost think of it as Apple offering a discount if you'll go with the smallest SSD, so they can capture more of the market while still keeping their average profit margins high.

If Apple charged "competitive $/TB prices", the small-SSD option would likely be more expensive, rather than the larger-SSD options being cheaper.

Yeah, it would be interesting if she had worn her Fitbit during the lab study, and we knew whether the Fitbit score during that time was the same or different. Otherwise it's kind of a meaningless anecdote. Maybe there's additional relevant detail that was not included in the article.

The presumption of innocence is a legal presumption. Anyone is free to make private judgments about someone's innocence or guilt without waiting for a criminal verdict. That said, Amazon's phrasing ("this woman was caught on camera breaking into a vehicle") does seem a bit reckless. If the person in the video is innocent, she can and should sue Amazon for defamation.

You’re saying that intelligence agencies should infiltrate and spy on dissident groups?

Pretty sure they do that already, but weird to see people advocate for it.

That is interesting, but the study you cite concerns medical malpractice lawsuits. Determining that a doctor was negligent in such lawsuits no doubt involves difficult issues, but issues perhaps far less complex than those at play in the Roundup lawsuits, where, as the parent comment said, the jury must decide "does glyphosate cause cancer, and did it specifically cause this cancer."

Oh I get it now, in order to be less "partisan", the comment should include political commentary that you agree with

It's a very well publicized example of the problem of federal agents unnecessarily using militarized police procedures. The commenter didn't say anything partisan about it. If others wet their pants at the mention of Roger Stone because OMG TRUMP, it's their fault.

so anyone who has been at a shooting range needs to be raided by a SWAT team when arrested for white-collar crimes?

While I have no problem with the linked article I think the headline is a bit unfair. How often is BS-ey pseudoscience like this really used and cited by UX designers in the field? It would seem to be mainly an issue among the most bloated, coddled, and self-important UX teams.

And was the BS paper in question really used to design the Android UI rather than justify the design decisions? (The article's author basically makes this same point.)

I basically agree, I think that most good design work is done based on intuition, but designers should be able to justify design decisions, and criticize them, based on objective criteria, especially for aspects of a design that further some functional purpose of a product rather than being simply aesthetic or decorative in nature.

It's noteworthy that Alan Sokal was involved in debunking the paper discussed in the article.

He's the guy who caused an uproar in academic circles (in mainstream media too) with his notorious 1996 hoax in which he submitted a paper loaded with comically absurd assertions to a postmodern journal called Social Text and it got published. Google "Sokal hoax" for a good laugh.

Amy context to this? Is it an unusually large number of tech company layoffs?

Yes, it often inverts before recessions, but most recessions do not accompany financial crises. The business cycle is normal; financial crises are (or should be) abnormal.

Yes, raise now and to be safe, assume that you will not be able to raise money again.

So your theory is that Lopp is taking these steps to protect himself from people who want to hurt him because he talks about Bitcoin publicly and the Bitcoin price has come down? That is wacky.

And you also claim he is a criminal who profited from an “illegal pyramid scheme”? Does this apply to anyone who has sold Bitcoin for more than they bought it for?

"In about 15% of cases, customers leave no tip, and DoorDash pays the entire amount, the company tells us. (The default tip is usually set to 15% the app.) ... In the next roughly 45% of cases, customers contribute less than half the money required to meet the minimum quoted fee–called the 'guaranteed amount'–leaving DoorDash to chip in the majority of the fee."

So under their model, if you tip well, you're subsidizing people who don't tip at all.

There is a competitive element when lots of VC money is chasing hot investments — the company has leverage to get investors to accept unfavorable terms. It is an aspect of our bubbly financial climate, like the boom in "covenant-lite" loans.

Also, there is a Ponzi-like aspect to VC funding in general, where incentives favor ever-rising valuations rather than the cultivation of sustainable, profitable businesses.

What's your point? He is still violating his fiduciary duty to the corporation by looting it to enrich himself personally.

Never thought I’d come across a long Chesterton passage on HN. Hooray!

It's like when someone says something funny, then another person follows up with a witticism that basically repeats the same joke...

Like someone makes an inspired pun and some dude immediately exclaims "LITERALLY!"

Well, they're reporting on the recent release of a notable paper written by an academic who has a reputation for "uncovering fraud in financial markets," at least that's what the article says. Presumably that paper was released today or this week or something.

I'm not arguing that the paper is or isn't actually worthy of having this NYT article written about it, but what is your suspicion regarding the timing, exactly?

The Vegetarian Myth https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003PJ7JXY/