edderly

See: https://conversationswithtyler.com/episodes/alexander-the-gr...

"ALEXANDER THE GRATE: So, one thing about food insecurity — everybody talks about that, but nobody mentions toilet insecurity. What comes in has got to go out, and that’s not readily . . . Before the Eisenhower Memorial, with a free restroom here — that’s back up by the resources by the way — the closest one to the area was at the Washington Monument, a mile away, basically."

https://djonesvi.medium.com/eric-weinstein-on-the-secretly-c...

Obviously that can veer into uncomfortable conclusions i.e. is it true, or is this kind of racist?

"I'm being kept in the dark and fed shit"

Which applies to a lot of dis-functional workplaces.

My criticism is that there is a risk about putting yourself or your buddies (I assume Collison is one) in the same frame as people who are exceptionally notable. Hence I will give Gladwell a break as a journalist just bombastically making claims to entertain people because he is talking about other people.

Here though, is Graham credibly putting himself in the same category as Mozart? Dropping a reference to Patrick Collison, who no one outside of tech would have a clue who that is in the same breath as you namedrop Newton?

Ask for feedback on your performance while working remotely. Also you can provide evidence that you are working & performing well.

Clearly you want to still work for this company, point that out.

Ask yourself what your career path is at this company, is there a difference between your expectations at this place and theirs? Will this be affected by your presence in the office?

Do not put salary and benefits discussions on the table yourself, leave that up to the company.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ashes-of-star-treks-scott...

Does anyone have any guidelines for this type of code?

"We can solve any problem by introducing an extra level of indirection."

I'm extremely skeptical that this solves any particular problem other than for Amazon building devices, silicon vendors who want to be in Amazon devices. Which is fine, but the scope of this seems to be broader. It just doesn't sound like the right idea to me.

The biggest issue is the "common" part. You want to produce an api or abi common across OSs? How many chances do you have to get it right and not run into a web of api version bugs & issues? Who has made this successful in the past? UDI? (nope) And then you want a common api across an RTOS and Linux? Good luck.

Oh and by the way, where's the source code for this middleware?

I don't know why you wouldn't take the approach of making the underlying OS's easier to work with. If FreeRTOS is missing something, enhance it. If embedded Linux(s) are hard to integrate with, start an open source project to work on that problem.

https://www.foundmyfitness.com/episodes/coffee-and-amino-aci...

Perth and the Dunfermline site are roughly 30 miles apart, on public transport the trip would take roughly 2 hours.

Sounds like a great idea castigate an employer in a semi-rural area with piss poor public transportation.

On the one hand you wonder whether Google will get in a huff and close AOSP (The Android Open Source Project) just to work with a few commercial vendors. They can leave the complainants to work together on an fork where they can do what they wish.

Or, which I hope they would do by now, actually run AOSP like a true open source project.

In the latter case I think the strategy that they've used so far "was" the right one (open source but not open for debate), however Android is now mature enough that I think developing a true open source community would benefit it.

The world has been unsettled by a surge in forced migration. Tens of millions of people are on the move, fleeing their home countries in search of a better life abroad. Some are escaping civil war or an oppressive regime; others are forced out by extreme poverty, lured by the possibility of economic advancement for themselves and their families.

Our collective failure to develop and implement effective policies to handle the increased flow has contributed greatly to human misery and political instability—both in countries people are fleeing and in the countries that host them, willingly or not. Migrants are often forced into lives of idle despair, while host countries fail to reap the proven benefit that greater integration could bring.

Governments must play the leading role in addressing this crisis by creating and sustaining adequate physical and social infrastructure for migrants and refugees. But harnessing the power of the private sector is also critical.

Recognizing this, the Obama administration recently launched a “Call to Action” asking U.S. companies to play a bigger role in meeting the challenges posed by forced migration. Today, private-sector leaders are assembling at the United Nations to make concrete commitments to help solve the problem.

In response, I have decided to earmark $500 million for investments that specifically address the needs of migrants, refugees and host communities. I will invest in startups, established companies, social-impact initiatives and businesses founded by migrants and refugees themselves. Although my main concern is to help migrants and refugees arriving in Europe, I will be looking for good investment ideas that will benefit migrants all over the world.

This commitment of investment equity will complement the philanthropic contributions my foundations have made to address forced migration, a problem we have been working on globally for decades and to which we have dedicated significant financial resources.

We will seek investments in a variety of sectors, among them emerging digital technology, which seems especially promising as a way to provide solutions to the particular problems that dislocated people often face. Advances in this sector can help people gain access more efficiently to government, legal, financial and health services. Private businesses are already investing billions of dollars to develop such services for non-migrant communities.

This is why money now moves instantaneously from one mobile wallet to another, drivers find customers by using only a cellphone, and how a doctor in North America can see a patient in Africa in real time. Customizing and extending these innovations to serve migrants will help improve the quality of life for millions around the world.

All of the investments we make will be owned by my nonprofit organization. They are intended to be successful—because I want to show how private capital can play a constructive role helping migrants—and any profits will go to fund programs at the Open Society Foundations, including programs that benefit migrants and refugees.

As longtime champions of civil society, we will be focused on ensuring that our investments lead to products and services that truly benefit migrants and host communities.

We will also work closely with organizations such as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Rescue Committee to establish principles to guide our investments. Our goal is to harness, for public good, the innovations that only the private sector can provide.

I hope my commitment will inspire other investors to pursue the same mission.

Mr. Soros is chairman of Soros Fund Management LLC and founder of the Open Society Foundations.

Think about that. Almost every mayor in the U.S. is wracking his brain trying to entice jobs into town. Yet Palo Alto—3.8% unemployment, a magnet for the geek class, the place that nurtured Facebook —is telling everyone else to get lost.

I had to meet this guy. Near City Hall, I pulled my (proudly gas guzzling) car into a spot between a white Tesla and a black Tesla. This was the Coral parking zone, giving me two hours before I had to move to the Lime zone. Nearby stood the Epiphany, a new $800-a-night hotel, just down from the ancient House of Foam, fulfilling all your polyurethane and polystyrene needs. Next to the Verizon Wireless store, the old Stanford Theater was showing a Ruth Chatterton double feature. Palo Alto, 65,000 people sitting on 26 square miles of some of the most valuable land anywhere, is certainly a town of contrasts.

The city doesn’t have a mayoral election. Instead, the council members, some of whom identify as slow-growth “residentialists,” install one of their own as mayor for a one-year term. Now it’s Patrick Burt’s turn, and he’s making the most of it. “Big tech companies are choking off the downtown,” he told the New York Times.

Right before the mayor went rogue, one of the city’s planning commissioners, Kate Downing, resigned in an open letter. Her family, she said, couldn’t afford to live in Palo Alto any longer. She’s got a point.

Michael Dreyfus, a top real-estate agent in the area, says the cheapest home for sale is a three-bedroom, one-bathroom, 959 square footer on about an eighth of an acre that backs up to train tracks. The asking price (are you sitting down?) is $1.35 million. Or he can sell you a place with five beds and four and a half baths on less than half an acre for $17.5 million. OK, that one is in desirable Old Palo Alto, but it isn’t even that old—no cobblestone streets or anything.

I wanted to ask Mayor Burt: Is stifling job creation really going to help? Or would that only boost surrounding towns? Palo Alto has already capped the annual growth of office space. It took years to approve a new $5 billion Stanford Hospital extension, which the area desperately needed. Even worse, there is a funny quirk in the zoning laws that limits what’s allowed in so-called Pedestrian and Transit Oriented Development areas (downtown). This includes restrictions on research and development, a catchall for limited manufacturing, “storage or use of hazardous materials,” and “computer software and hardware firms.”

I can tell you outright that the only hazardous materials in an office of software coders are their high-test caffeine concoctions. But the software firms are many. Amazon has its search team in Palo Alto. The big-data firm Palantir has been gobbling up buildings for its engineers. Facebook had several before moving to neighboring Menlo Park. SurveyMonkey has a huge site near the train station.

Even Palo Alto’s residential areas are filled with startups, real-life versions of Erlich Bachman’s house from HBO’s “Silicon Valley.” They’re easy to spot, having more cars parked during the day than at night. These companies offer high-paying and productive jobs that are great for society.

Someone asked on Quora, the question-and-answer website—whose offices, not coincidentally, used to be right across the street from City Hall before being moved to neighboring Mountain View—“Will Palo Alto Mayor Patrick Burt really be able to ban tech companies?” One outlier’s answer included this line: “The way to moderate housing prices in the face of growing demand is to . . . build more housing.”

Mayor Burt told Curbed San Francisco that he wants “metered job growth, and metered housing growth.” To me, “metered” implies pay as you go. The city government’s job should be to build out infrastructure to meet increased demand.

The thing is that Palo Alto has plenty of room. The city reaches from the San Francisco Bay all the way up to the top of the hills holding back the Pacific Ocean. The city says that only 0.5% of “developable land” is vacant. But that doesn’t tell the whole story.

In 2011 residents passed a measure with 65% of the vote to take 10 acres of city parkland and turn it into a composting facility. If my math is right, that’s enough room for 80 “affordable” homes. Sounds like Palo Alto has room but chooses not to make it available for anyone else. It’s not exactly NIMBY—Not In My Back Yard. But maybe IGMYOOL—I Got Mine, You’re Out Of Luck. That’s the definition, I suppose, of a residentialist.

Even downtown has room: upward. Most buildings are two stories, maybe three. Only one, filled with lawyers and venture capitalists, hits 15 stories. Though there’s also City Hall, which is eight floors. I took the elevator to the seventh to see if I could drop in on Mayor Burt. Turns out mayor is a part-time job. Mr. Burt’s full-time gig is running a medical-technology company doing research and development in . . . Palo Alto. Hmmm.

Mr. Kessler, a former hedge-fund manager, is the author of “Eat People” (Portfolio, 2011).

http://www.victorianweb.org/history/slums.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_End_of_London

Full disk encryption doesn't protect you against most 'normal' security attacks like privilege escalation, because once an attacker has gained that privilege they can read any data off the mounted encrypted file-system.

The way FDE works is that you're encrypting the blocks stored on the physical storage eMMC[1], so if someone gets their hands on your device and physically tampers with it, in theory, with enough skill and fiddly soldering and wiring to an SD card adapter you could access the data.

However, many SoCs stack the eMMC on top of the application processor directly, look up package on package or "POP". This means you can't even access any pins to wire up an adapter without "extremely" specialized equipment. We're talking about slicing a layer off the chip package without damaging it.

[1]I've left out physical SDcards because until recently there was no facility to encrypt you data in a cross platform compatible way on these devices. Android treats SDcards as plain unencryted FAT/exFAT storage by default anyway.