chapill

The selection has the cat's back legs fused together. Same for the dog. Adobe's magic wand could do a better job than this example.

I would be surprised if Walmart accepted open box drone returns at all. My local electronics store does not. It makes sense too. I've bought two drones and both died quickly due to collisions. Maybe there are drones that are stable and easy to fly, but the product category seems designed to eat money. I lost interest after the second one.

That's non-sequitur. I can't even imagine who you think suls would be shilling for. Are you accusing suls of shilling and asking me to report that for you?

I've merely asked for elaboration and provided a recent article that seems to contradict suls statement. If there's market research indicating that Amazon is winning against Rakuten in Japan, that would be interesting to me.

I found it odd. I'm recognizing the importance of the issue to suls, as it drew this person to respond when the account goes for weeks without commenting on submissions.

Do you find this sort of acknowledgement of a commenter's behavioral patterns odd? Why did you ask?

It did a really poor job on the pictured cat sample. No separation on the back legs and the back is nearly a straight line. It doesn't seem very good at separating like colored objects.

>If the models

If? I believe you just told me that you didn't build the model yourself. You're validating my statements from your first word. This is my point. It's the information equivalent of hearsay.

I've noticed this problem, but I wouldn't call it a reputation age as much as I would call it an opinion age. People form strong opinions about which they've done no personal study based on the Appeal to Authority logical fallacy.

Take author's moon landing example. If you really care, there are mirrors on the moon. If you want to know we've been there or not, you can devise an experiment, fire a laser at those mirrors, and get a reflected beam back.

People now call things like "climate change" a science (and it's settled!), without doing the fundamental thing science requires: An experiment with a control group. Climate models are statistical correlation, not an experiment with a control group. It is not proof of causality.

I guess the devs tested with their adblock enabled,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHxHTPDrwVM

I see an ad for a video game beside the video on this page.

https://i.imgur.com/eV5Vz5Z.jpg

I'm sure I could find plenty more examples.

JavaFX doesn't even do ARM linux anymore. Qt is basically the only option on such hardware now. It seems odd they don't recommend Qt bindings for Java applications here or on their wiki though.

https://wiki.qt.io/Language_Bindings

Why not indeed. Advertisers in general don't want to be associated with extremists of any stripe.

From the linked opinion piece in the story:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/10/opinion/sunday/youtube-po...

"YouTube leads viewers down a rabbit hole of extremism, while Google racks up the ad sales."

So the big question is, why not demonetize them? Removing all ads probably has a pretty significant impact on the algorithm already.

Why doesn't YouTube do the right thing? Stop making money on extremists? It seems like doing that would auto correct the problems.

One reason for the move not mentioned in OP,

https://reactjs.org/blog/2015/10/19/reactiflux-is-moving-to-...

"Discord is the easiest platform to join. New users can immediately join our conversations without having to create an account."

That is, frankly, the killer feature.

Notwithstanding, I find it odd that developers here don't use E2E chats. It's always something clear text with permanent history, and in the case of Slack, key logging too! There's a JS based xmpp framework out there.

https://www.jsxc.org/

It puzzles me why no one uses such things.

The irony here is art187 has illustrated CoCs not working while espousing their virtues. HN guidelines is a CoC, even though it isn't named that. It has all the hallmarks of a typical CoC.

Here, art187 has made a generic comment and, as you point out, posted a shallow dismissal of the author's work. Both in violation of hn guidelines.

The original post by art187 could have succinctly been stated as "I disagree" which basically adds nothing to the conversation.

No action has been taken after 17 hours. It's still the top rated comment.

The author's submission highlights what the author thinks is "The Problem": CoCs don't work.

It's fine to disagree with that, but it's helpful to point to examples of a CoC working rather than creating another example of them not working. At the very least, comments ought to discuss specific points. None of that happened here.

Contrast that with benign comments that moderators label as "personal attacks"

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16456045

But when there are actual personal attacks made against people with the "wrong" opinions,

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16449741

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16449842

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16067802

No actions are taken. The implications are clear. The CoC here is used as a stick to smack people with opinions that the moderators don't like. All more evidence in favor of the author's stated assertion that CoCs don't actually work.

>I’m not ignoring the article

You didn't address any points made by the author. You made a generic comment that could apply to any post on codes of conduct, and that's specifically against Hacker News posting guidelines.

>Disclaimer, I help run an organization that requires CoC's on all events.

>I like this article but it doesn't go into the positives of a CoC. There are many problems but if you don't weigh them against the positive characteristics, you don't see the full picture.

The author mentions this,

"People are trying to force organizations like CCC, or events I am involved with, at a smaller scale (I cannot talk for other events I don't know anything about), to adopt a CoC because they feel like it works for them, and therefore everyone should adopt a CoC regardless of the own culture of each community."

It seems you're doing exactly this and you've ignored large parts of the reasoning in the author's post.

When someone visits your home, they are your guest, and they treat it as a privilege to be there. If they don't, you kick them out and don't invite them back.

It was Broadcom CEOs privilege to be a guest in the White House, not the other way round.

It's rather odd watching the same group that wants Net Neutrality and municipal broadband disagree with you.

Trump's nationalized 5G idea is brilliant in that it consolidates all efforts, but also serves to protect freedom. Under the privatized approach we use now, wireless ISPs spy on us, and sell the data to the government. That's constitutional and legal, because the government didn't do the spying. Under a nationalized plan, it would be unconstitutional for the government to conduct dragnet spying.

Do we drive on corporate owned highways? No, and we have the most extensive highway system in the world. For comparison, look how well privatized rail worked out. You're right. Privatized infrastructure sucks.

>they told me they like to set arbitrary deadlines for their projects because once people are late they work harder.

This is all of SV though, not just Apple. I noticed author didn't compare working hours. Every SV company I know of is totally abusive about hours.

>Many cryptographers and organizations, including the US Government, have recommended for a long time that people migrate from older "big prime cryptography" based cryptosystems to ECC based cryptosystems for increased security.

Not what I've heard.

https://threatpost.com/nsas-divorce-from-ecc-causing-crypto-...

This is easy to understand. The autonomous cars I've encountered drive terribly. They signal too early, leading other drivers to believe they are turning into a business instead of at an intersection. They drive slowly in the wrong lanes. They don't adapt to surrounding conditions. They have no situational awareness.

Of course, the company will blame the humans, but the cars are not designed to broadcast visual cues that human drivers do.

Here's an archive link since the original is not secure and fails to load without JS.

https://archive.fo/CpUwi

I found this pcmag link more enlightening than the NYT article.

https://www.pcmag.com/news/359702/us-broadcom-qualcomm-merge...

Specifically, the last paragraph,

"Broadcomm added that most of its board of directors and senior management team is made up of Americans. It also contends that the company's plan to buy Qualcomm will no longer fall under CFIUS's review when Broadcom finishes relocating to the US."

It seems CFIUS wants solid assurance that this happens so the US can continue scooping up all the communications of everyone world wide.

The US government didn't appoint Qualcomm winner of the LTE market with IP protections just to let them sell it off to a company outside US control.

If the US blocks a Broadcom/Qualcomm merger, what's to stop ${US_Corp} making a hostile takeover of Qualcomm instead?

Clearly the two giant governments are battling over control of the closed source baseband backdoors in all mobile devices.

>It sure isn’t in the company’s privacy policy

What they are doing is illegal in the state of California.

Defect rates have long been overstated.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2002/04/04/us/few-risks-seen-to-t...

Openly racist submission by long time HN account. Still up on /newest/ after 20 minutes.

The problem with accepting HN or Slashdot's definition is both groups are extremely biased in this matter. The general consensus is patent troll == non practicing entity.

https://thelawdictionary.org/patent-troll/

Everyone here can disagree all they want, but they're still wrong as far as most lay persons are concerned.

50% of the companies in the US incorporate in Delaware. Is that also tail wagging the dog?

https://www.delawareinc.com/corporation/

>Pretty obvious patent trolling

Not really. The patent was filed in 2000. Approved in 2007. It hasn't changed hands. The company makes software.

Believe it or not, this is the US system working as intended.

An obvious troll is a patent holding company, with no products, who purchases old patents, then goes on a suing spree for any company that uses printers.

This is hating the player, not the game. The only way to win is not to play. Relocate to a country with no software patents. I hear Estonia is great. Do all your filing online. Be a remote working foreign contractor for your own company :P

>Lee alleges that she was slapped in the face by a drunk male co-worker "for no apparent reason.

It seems like having drunk co-worker is the problem here. Why does Google allow drinking at work? That seems like a really bad idea.