devnullbrain

If all you want to do is play what's on sheet music, a player piano will do the job.

Bạn nghĩ tốt hơn nếu chúng ta giao tiếp bằng nghĩa mọi người không thể hiểu ko?

That's still concerning. If your mental model of a scale is via the notes, the piano has helpful colour coding. Not being able to use that implies that the scales have instead been memorised by how they're played - frets, valves, etc. - that will stop working when a more in-depth application of keys is needed.

The acceptance of 'literally' to mean 'not literally' means English now has no simple, consistent way to say something is literally literal. At least linguistics nerds are happy though!

It's not a sports team. If it was, editors, teachers and code reviewers would be its supporters. I'd prefer not to live in a world without those.

Worse evolving opposite meanings is a real problem. Another example that became popular this century is 'entitled'. Now it means both 'being entitled to something' and 'wrongly thinking you're entitled to something'. So now a word we don't have a simple alternative for is less useful because it has become ambiguous. It also retroactively makes past uses ambiguous. This has a real cost to communication and the remedy is to enforce style to avoid it happening to other words.

Evolution isn't unidirectional. English reached what it is today not only through the influence of people using words with new meanings but also with the force of people mandating style, taste and opinion. You wouldn't use 'normalized' if it wasn't for Noah Webster calling the shots.

Moralising about caring about style is itself prescriptivism.

The use of prescriptivists as though it was a sports team is ironic. It's actually you who's pushing a certain use of language despite knowing that it's ambiguous. You're the one enforcing your language on others.

>Note that "The Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary, Collins English Dictionary and the Oxford Dictionaries regard the form comprised of as standard English usage."

I've never found this a convincing argument. Think of when you use a dictionary: it's because you want to understand a word that you don't understand in its context. If it didn't include all uses, the dictionary wouldn't help you. A dictionary a tool to help consume language.

If you want help to produce language, you refer to a style guide. The barrier for acceptability is much higher there.

I feel the same way about s/use/utilize. It's like Joey on Friends using a thesaurus.

See also 'Due to the fact' -> 'because'

So much of ridiculous fantasy fiction is based in ridiculous monarchical reality.

This is a common theme for centralised infrastructure. e.g. power grids, roads, rail.

>Remember: if you're not paying for the product, you are the product!

This cliche isn't true: if you pay, you're a more valuable mark. You're always a product.

Free hosting for the masses of porn on the internet is a low interest rate phenomenon.

I would consider a targeted attack to be less of a risk than a systemic attack on a password manager provider. Local invasive vs. remote non-invasive.

New products were part of the original Indiegogo fundraising. This has always been the plan.

As a Proton Unlimited subscriber & general supporter of the company:

I don't care who it is hosting it, I don't want my password manager connected to the internet. There is cognitive dissonance when this community that distrusts IoT, call-home LLMs, URL bars that send data to Google and 5G-connected vehicles is willing to connect their most critical private data to a single, profit-seeking source-of-failure.

The password generation and encryption is an easy, solved problem that you can get for free! For any of these services, you're only paying for the UI, backup and internet connectivity. Companies have failed at this before and will fail again.

The awkward phrasing is SEO spam.

This is a very Samsung move: making their premium product feel cheap and cynical to users for easy money.

Mentally, we seem to be able to adapt well to things that we can relate to what we 'should' know about. So roads are similar to naturally occurring tracks with landmarks.

This seems to break down when we deal with things without easily appreciated analogues e.g. black holes and quantum physics.

OTOH I don't know why we can pick up driving and cycling so easily. Some people instinctively know how to countersteer an oversteering car.

They'll overbook before the day

Alas the only way to denote ownership of digital goods is with technology that I benefit from financially.

> 1. Other gaming platforms could add support to interface with it.

Why would they?

Games consoles are a strange consumer product. They live and die on the ability to make deals with third parties and only a small number of companies have ever had sustained success.

>was, and continues to be, only about the EU. Not about the predatory businesses creating these banners

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17679596

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25457469

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30982470

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23090393

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29529062

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19381063

All of these links have comments against this sentiment.

7 years of complaining about it hasn't changed that. Do you think another 7 years will be more effective?

Alternatively, the EU could change the laws. Or enforce the existing ones.

And yet it's been 7 years and the banners still exist.

Superficially, the banners appeared due to how the law was made and how it's implemented. The noble intention is one thing and the pragmatic reality is another.

It's correct to blame the businesses for creating the banners but also unfair to treat the matter as if the businesses and the EU are on a level playing field. The EU makes laws - it has cheat codes to achieve what it wants.

It's like defensive driving. You may not be at fault if someone crashes into you but you may have had the power to prevent it.

>Unfortunately, I also needed to unblock my team so that progress wouldn’t grind to a halt whenever I decided to work on a new feature. Eventually, I figured out that I couldn’t take on projects in the “critical path,”

This is a important lesson. As an IC, it's hugely frustrating to be blocked on your own work because the gatekeeper is busy working on something more important. If the manager is the only person you can trust with the important work, something is broken.

There's just not enough time in the day to do 8 hours of IC work if you're also responsible for reviewing 8 hours of work from N reports. You are a thread consuming a queue.

Using an NB Miata is interesting: they're common donor cars for modern Locosts. That crowd might appreciate this as the ultimate workshop manual.