devindotcom

what a revealing question. why don't you ask one next time you're in a car?

Good for them. These companies appear exploitative and rent-seeking far beyond what the infrastructure they provide suggests is reasonable.

If you're interested, next time you take a car, ask the driver what their end is - you may be surprised how little of the fare they actually take home. That share will only decrease unless they all get on one side of a table.

ah.. a fallacy guy. there should be a named fallacy for mischaracterizing remarks so they fit the form of a fallacy, in order to clothe one's argument in an illusory erudition.

anyway if anything it would probably be poisoning the well. really though it's just pointing out that cliff isn't a garden variety climate scientist and comes with something like a warning label.

cliff is an expert but also famously sort of a "climate contrarian" and his takes are regularly cited by climate skeptics and conservative irritants here in the PNW. just noting his takes don't exist in a vacuum.

i think calling it "subjective opinion" is kind of disingenuous. it is a subject matter expert interpreting the data. there is a vast gulf between that and someone else simply offering their opinion on the matter.

are you not familiar with the actual game rogue, or nethack?

that's actually a beloved feature of "true" roguelikes

The full series is on Archive:

https://archive.org/details/bbc-connections-1978/Connections...

It still holds up for the most part, though of course some of the takes, being almost 50 years old, may seem a bit quaint. It's certainly worth watching the first series at least start to finish. Burke is an interesting guy.

you should read the article before commenting

Was hoping this was a lacquered F-91W, but the calculator is pretty nice too.

fwiw a lot of his programming has for decades included explicit conservation messaging and warnings about climate change, disappearing habitats, etc. It's an old strategy (and one he helped invent) of making people care about the thing they're seeing before telling them it's being destroyed.

Lens for image quality and sensor size and density for resolution, but we hit pretty hard limits on those a long time ago. Software on top of that has been the major differentiator for quite some time. Exposure stacking and intelligent detail control produce more improvement for less investment than a super-complex lens assembly or exotic sensor. Though it brings its own risks.

https://techcrunch.com/2018/10/22/the-future-of-photography-...

Not to say there is no movement on the other fronts. Glass was pushing for a crazy anamorphic lens and far larger sensor that would have been a serious improvement, but I don't know if it went anywhere.

https://techcrunch.com/2022/03/22/glass-rethinks-the-smartph...

certainly people are finding everyday uses... but a lot of those uses are necessitated by enshittification of search and other commonplace tools. so although I think many see the usefulness of the technology here and there, their experience of it is one of being forced to adopt a thing they never asked for by companies with few or no sincere or articulable values.

billions use windows and gmail but have a poor opinion of microsoft and google both for obvious reasons. I expect the same will be true of AI platforms and the usual suspects behind them.

Oh no it's the model that's ethical, not the company.

literally none of this is true

gross. I want to unread it now. annoying because this kind of brand degradation is something important to me. but that's not enough to make me read a Palantir AI dude.

maybe 20 years ago you could pull that same bird talk. now it has become extremely disingenuous.

>But that doesn't sound like something I'd want imposed on all music on a platform.

that's fine. there's room for multiple platforms. personally I would pay for the thing I describe, sounds like you wouldn't. but the question is not whether you or i would, but whether enough people would to make it a viable business - whether it's the platform, or the method, or a label that licenses its music in a certain way, or what.

don't sell your work short. it has value because it comes from you, and struggling to finish is unbelievably common in the creation process - not to mention frustration and a lack of joy.

if you're creating because you feel a drive to create, you are making art and that has intrinsic value to yourself and others. if however you are performing the act of musical creation as a means to an end, what you are doing may be better considered work and not art. the work of others can also be appreciated but it is different.

keep at it though. you are asking good questions and unlike many you are also personally engaging with them.

sounds like you don't really care about this honestly, so i'll reflect your apathy

music can be performed live and in person. many musicians work with other musicians, labels, studios etc. a web of trust can be built and verification via performance is a compelling option. not complete but it's certainly an option.

would you as a label sign an artist you'd never seen perform? maybe there is value in a platform working under similar constraints.

I don't grant it. if you mean it is impossible to tell from the music itself, perhaps. but there are other means of verification.

bandcamp: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46605490

however you might feel about AI generated media, flooding platforms with unlabeled slop is nothing but scammer behavior and we should take serious measures to disincentivize it for both the uploaders and service providers.

I do suspect we are in for a lot of verified-human platforms where your fee goes to supporting establishing an artist or author's humanity beyond a reasonable doubt.

Same thing happened to me and it did not default to lossy. Days later I got the "you will stop receiving email soon" warning in Gmail.

Happened to me too, almost identically. Clearly this is a pattern across the major consumer cloud app/service providers.

i'm sorry but where are you seeing this completely opposite and substantial improvement?

>The team found nearly identical performance for the torpedo and standard bats except that the sweet spot for the torpedo bat was a half inch farther from the bat tip than the standard bat.

>“It was actually pretty phenomenal how close they were,” said Smith.

>For some players who like to hit the ball closer in, the torpedo bat might be a better option for them

some players with some batting characteristics may find this better? is that what you are referring to? What part of the article disputes this at all, let alone concludes the opposite? Is it the researcher's own quote? I really don't understand your objection here. It seems to be based on your own intuition about how players "generally" hit balls. But the researchers themselves have presented their own data and conclusions pretty clearly here.

the last sentence is part of a paragraph specifying it "might" be better for "some players who like to hit the ball closer in"

not really ignored when it's in the article. the researchers themselves are quoted saying the results are incredibly close.

I would expect them to build and staff studios and soundstages down there. Location shooting is expensive wherever you go - this is about getting away from US labor and other costs. They're not the only ones doing it either.

well, there sure was a lot in the countries involved!! they have all lobbied and argued extensively in favor of their selected name for many years, and their people do seem to feel strongly about these matters.

I don't have a final answer for all situations, but certainly if you look at those things on the map right now they read one name, then the other in parentheses. The "Gulf of America" has no such parenthetical. That seems like an acceptable compromise that Google has already adopted in other disputes. I suspect it will rile the current administration, however, if they do so here, and so they have not.

edit: oh, I find Google has already addressed this, and it is only in the US that it is just gulf of america:

https://blog.google/products/maps/united-states-geographic-n...

ah well.