joelfried

Given that knowingly visiting one of these locations exposes you to potential liability in the state of Texas, I wonder whether this exposes Google itself to any liability -- especially if there's any chance that they might log you at an abortion clinic when you in fact were next door . . .

I think we can go further.

From the US Copyright Office[1]: "A mere listing of ingredients is not protected under copyright law", and from their linked circular on that page [2]: "forms typically contain empty fields or lined spaces as well as words or short phrases that identify the content that should be recorded in each field or space".

A list of identifiers and their weights seems pretty explicitly not protected under one or the other of these.

[1] https://www.copyrightlaws.com/copyright-protection-recipes/ [2] https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ33.pdf

I'm sorry, but courts have lost most of their credibility in recent years. There was an HN thread recently[1] about a person arrested and extradited from one state to another without what appears to be any oversight. Pretending the courts are magic isn't actually very helpful here. If any single person in power wanted this information, they could have it. If any single person not in power wanted this information, they would have to work really hard to get it.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35389566

"They already know" is a red herring; there is no "they". "Government" as a single entity has no brain, so the best you can do is ask about individual actors. So let's talk instead about a person: Merrick Garland.[1]

Pretend for a moment that Merrick receives a piece of memo from a subordinate that incriminates you in some form of bank fraud. Of course Merrick personally doesn't know anything about your bank account. Nobody has both the information and a brain big enough to store it. Hell, I have to check my own bank account regularly because I keep forgetting exactly how much is in there and it's my own money!

If something came across Merrick's desk and it convinced _him_ that it was worthwhile to investigate, do you really expect other than delays waiting for signed papers before he got the information he wanted? Do you really think there's a difference to Merrick whether he gets that information in 60 seconds by logging into your bank "as you" and looking at it, or whether he waits a few days and gets hand delivered a piece of paper by a bank's legal team?

[1] U.S. Attorney General and current chief law enforcement officer for the nation

Every year we find out the guys in their 80s running the country don't care because they'll be dead soon.

It's definitely personal, and hearing what you prioritize and why helps. Thanks!

> Almost a pleasure, in fact

Could you elaborate a bit on your workflow that makes it almost enjoyable? My personal workflow can always use an upgrade and I'd love to hear what works for you!

> There are no special techniques, unless one are dealing with special needs kids.

You may not know your child is neurodivergent until you are at or beyond this stage of development.

We tried that with our first and it didn't work. Some children require more direct support. Knowing what works for those who need it is pretty huge.

There is more to it than that if indeed he was flagged by a facial recognition pass triggered on a toll booth integrated into some warrant database and one policeman clicking "good enough" too easily. How deeply have these systems integrated themselves into the day to day of police investigations? Are any digital warrant requests ever denied? What sorts of protections are there to make certain that the person on the other side of the warrant request is actually even a police officer?

A hundred years ago there was a real cost in time and effort and interpersonal relationships to get a judge to sign off on a warrant at a weird hour. Are the reductions of those costs brought about by using technology in this way a net win for society?

The policeman in this actual case did something wrong. Did he, out of a motivation to increase his arrest record, find a random black man across state lines to try and arrest? Did he, out of malice, choose to target this person? Did he, out of laziness, not look too closely at two pictures side-by-side and click a "Request Warrant" button? How easy, exactly, is this mistake to make? That question only makes sense because of the technology in the story.

I've noticed this feeling myself in the last year, and, honestly I've found it somewhat freeing by following this logic:

1. There is infinite content for me to consume.

2. I have a finite life.

3. Even if I spend my entire life trying, I cannot consume all content.

4. Since I cannot consume all content, there will be content that I will not consume that I would have enjoyed.

5. I want to spend my life doing some things other than consuming media.

6. Given 4 & 5, "I would enjoy it" is no longer a sufficient condition for me to consume some media.

7. Given 6, my feelings of FOMO have gone down considerably. What's to be afraid of, when there's always another product to fill the same "mild enjoyment" void?

Their blog about their methodology[1] implies to me it's an in-house solution. They also talk at length about maintaining provenance, ethics, and transparency. I found it a much more informative read than the product announcement.

[1] https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2023/03/21/responsible-inn...

> I get it provides some future proofing assurance

I don't think you're getting it, and a lot of us around here want you to. If I were actively researching heat pumps (a thing most homeowners do before dropping 4-5 figures on ANY hardware), if you are locking me into your ecosystem -- or even have the appearance of locking me into your ecosystem -- your product is not getting onto any short list from me or likely anyone else around here.

All of us -- every tech person who has ever gotten into home automation in a real way -- has thrown out some hardware rendered useless by a company. We've already seen this play out. You're an unknown and so are the riskiest kind of company to buy into.

You need to get this -- deeply -- if you want to sell to this market. The pull quote above makes me want to run for the hills.

Not OP, but grew up observant. What's meant there is that you choose to not change the state of the electronics. An light that's already on stays on the entire time - you don't turn it off. You end up with an extra set of intentionality - you have to decide during the week if you want lights during the evening in the winter on Friday nights (and if you do, how late should they be on as you're probably setting up a timer on a smart plug).

An Augmented Reality Walmart? We're there already?

Ohhhhh, that kind of AR!

I doubt it. There's too many ways for this not to work - the police testifies "I never saw that billboard". Even if they admit they saw it, so what? Anybody can say anything on a billboard, the police officer could say "Oh yeah, I saw it, but I have no idea if it's true" - and plausible deniability is sufficient as I understand it.

Anger… fear… aggression. The dark side are they. Easily they flow, quick to join you in a fight. If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny, consume you it will, as it did Obi-Wan’s apprentice. -- Master Yoda, Return of the Jedi

Of course it matters when you attempt to use your own social backing to boost someone else. That you're a commenter who has been around since 2018 who is also an "an ambitious full-stack software engineer, with a deep passion for design, user interface and front-end engineering"[1] is definitely a point in your favor, though. What made you personally feel so strongly about the original author? Your reasoning is more likely to help convince others especially if you have sources you can point to.

[1] I'm hoping he'll notice but for everyone else, I pulled this quote from the About page on the website linked from his profile.

So are you against giving people of limited means a way to shift part of the purchase cost of a necessary replacement item into the future? As a concrete example, it seems entirely reasonable to me for someone of limited means to spend something like $2,000 on a credit card to repair a broken car so that they are able to get to their job. If you don't give people a legal means to access money like that (even if the rates are borderline usurious), I would expect them to seek out illegal methods -- and that seems worse all around for society.

Assuming we're limiting our scope to the modern American public school system this won't help, at least where I'm located. Teachers are required to have Masters degrees and are paid within the range for a part time cashier at Lowe's[1]. We aren't going to fix this system until that changes; when we're paying that badly we're going to get the worst of what's left.

[1] Sourced the salary for teachers near me from Google's linked data. Sourced the Lowe's part time cashier range from an actual job listing in my area.

Edit: fixed footnote, sentence fragment.

I think you're missing the forest for the trees here somewhat. What I believe GP to mean is that rather than use written out names and data structure layouts that make code easy to digest for others on the team, some folks choose code that makes their personal mental models easy to construct. This can be extremely valuable, but is also very bespoke and difficult to maintain.

I completely agree with your last point regardless: those kinds of arguments honestly held between well meaning team members are definitely a strong indicator that the implementation used is mismatching the use case at some level.

I, as a user, want the best user experience I can have.

Who else cares more about the user experience and provides a viable alternative? Google goes out of its way to buy and kill products, and even their core product is so bad that I'm often finding myself making fun of how absolutely awful their search results are.[1].

Could I make Android work for me? With time and effort, probably. I'm very short on both of those and now it's not just my personal method of interaction - it's my entire family. So I'm not going to.

Just working seamlessly and caring about UX are pretty gigantic. It's not that Apple is that great, it's that all of the alternatives -- like searches on the Amazon catalog these days -- result in a surfeit of garbage.

[1] The most recent one I have was my search with the following three terms, no quotes in this order: ssri neuron mechanism. The first hit was a link to a Google Books book titled "Textbook of Rare Sexual Medical Conditions". I got that result last week. I just searched again and was unable to find that result anywhere on the first page today. What happened then that isn't happening now? I couldn't tell you but my email is the only thing I rely on Google for anymore and I'm very seriously considering migrating away from it in 2023 just because I don't trust Google with that most important part of my digital identity any longer.

Who is still supporting Windows 3.11?

I left chess.com for the same reason. You'd think it would be considered a best practice to not antagonize your paying customers . . . .

Over 60% of the way past the filter on /r/AskHistorians . . . Agreed we should be a touch more timely!

The way to get better behavior is to point out bad behavior wherever you see it, not shrug and treat it like a broken stair.

Except they don't - heavier objects fall at the same rate (G - 9.8m/s^2) as lighter ones. You can experiment with this yourself - try rolling a ping pong ball and baseball down the same incline. You'll see they hit the bottom at the same speed (wind resistance is a thing, hence the incline, and you'll get more accurate results indoors).

Don't feel bad though - Aristotle got this wrong and it took until Galileo to get it right.

Don't take my word for it though, here's a Scientific American article about it from 2013: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/bring-science-hom...

It fits between the kama used to harvest rice and the comma used to separate those thoughts.

I appreciate why it feels archaic writ large, but for folks who want to know the animals in question were raised in a certain way (free of antibiotics, to pick something clear), I for one feel more confident that the label is being honest if the meat was also raised here.