patrick5415

You’ve asked for hard data, and then make a contrary assertion for which you have no data either. No, glancing at a website periodically doesn’t count.

Personally, I agree with the op. If we want to send a message that malware in our BIOSs is absolutely unacceptable, it makes zero sense to give Lenovo any business.

Thank you. Listing to people intone about how dumb slippery slopes are makes one wonder if they think the world is 100% stochastic without a trend in sight.

As far as I can tell, a slippery slope is nothing more than a projection based on current and past data. I think it’s foolish to cast out such projection for the mere reason that they are projections. Rather, we ought to debate the quality of the data and model feeding the projection.

Labview is one of these languages, which I’ve used for the last 5 years. It’s the only tool I use daily that makes me want to blow my brains out. I think diagrams like these are really useful as high level visualizations, but fail miserably as a low level implementation.

It’s my opinion that one of the things that turns visual code into spaghetti is that refactoring is difficult, because the code grows in 2d, as opposed to 1d (I don’t count line length). It’s sort of like if you could have infinitely many columns of concurrently executing code in text a based function, where any line in a given column can be connected to any line in a different column.

I think what could be useful is a hybrid model, where you have something like text based modules whose communication is orchestrated by a visual diagram. For what it’s worth, Simulink can be used like this to some extent(e.g., hooking S-functions together) and I find it orders of magnitude more pleasant than labview.

Sure, but if the local grocer realizes he sold me stolen eggs, he doesn’t get to send his henchmen to my house in the middle of the night to steal them back.

The amazon/Orwell fiasco was the moment I decided to never buy a kindle and steer clear of anything with drm.

I disagree. If you have to understand the cause of undersires behaivor before a bug can be said to exist, then debugging is a prerequisite to a bug existing.

If I write a program that computes 2+2 and it tells me the answer is 5, that’s a bug. Why is irrelevant until I want to fix it.

Yes. Some of the best, most valuable questions and answers are closed for pedantic reasons.

This is a perspective I’ve not heard before and helps me take a less dim view of the SO rules.

While Im pretty sympathetic to the “RTFM” style rules, the one that really annoys me is the prohibition on question that will elicit answeres which are opinion based. It appears to me that experts often love to answer such questions. I don’t see how this fits into your framework of making things better for the answeres. Would you disagree?

Seriously. It’s hard to understand why Microsoft has been getting so much fanfare from the OS community recently.

The legitimacy of science is getting attacked because science is losing legitimacy. C.f. Every other thread on HN about science/acedemic publishing that’s not specific to climate change. If researchers would lose the sales tactics and just do the science, maybe they can win back our trust.

I agree. Also common is what basically amounts to lies through omission. They showed X, but it actually only holds in a very limited set of circumstances. And the manuscript is worded in a very clever way to dance around this fact.

I disagree that statisticians should adjust their definitions to fit common usage.

I can put any probably on anything I want. That doesn’t imply those numbers mean anything usefu or that what I’m doing is backed by any established theory.

Agree. I wish the entire internet looked like GNU documentation page.

I’d prefer legitimate api usage be broken than suffer through all the abuses.

Honestly? Because I see self driving cars as expensive toys for rich people[1], and I don’t feel like spending tax dollars or making other concessions to subsidize that.

I think the analogy to railroads is a bit tenuous. There are immediate benefits to connecting two sufficiently separated points with a rail line. A single stretch of properly marked and instrumented roadway is relatively worthless[1].

[1] Trucking being a potential exception.

>- lidar at night works just fine at night

Yes, let’s rely on a single sensor.

> - plenty of cities with no or very little snow

But plenty of city have plenty of snow. So perhaps not a deal breaker in a limited set of circumstances.

> - construction zones: blacklisting, remote monitoring & manual mapping, detection of cones, barriers, re-painted lanes

Why should we add to already high construction costs just because the self driving tech isn’t up to snuff?

>- self-driving cars with 360 degree view and plenty of patience and no distraction are safer for bicyclists than manually driven cars

Citation?

Once produced, viewing a hard copy has zero environmental impact. Every time you open a pdf or or whatever your iPad saves your notes as, (let alone sync it with Dropbox) a coal plant groans a tiny bit and a penguin dies.

If this is the “correct” way to shop Amazon, then the ops point is only stronger. It makes perfect sense to take your business elsewhere when these kind of shenanigans are required.

I disagree that worrying about timing is not a value add, at least for real time [1] applications. Worrying about the timing is absolutely crucial for applications like servo loops. Making timing guarantees seems a lot more straightforward with an fpga than an RTOS.

Controls folks and software people tend to have very different conceptions of what “real-time” means. I’m talking about a loop that must execute once every (say) microsecond exactly or things start physically breaking.

I’ve been buzzed by 120 quite a few times. Never 220 though. I also got shocked by about 800 volts from a tube radio once, which lit me up pretty good. Fortunately that was pretty low amperage I think.

Saying safety is important or repairablity is important are both subjective value judgements. I see zero reason why your estimation of the value of a safe car should force me to subsidize that safety when I buy a car, any more than me valuing a repairable design should force you to subsidize the extra documentation.

And here I thought the story was about the endless stream of “me too” comments in the bug report. Hard to find much signal in there.

I’m with you. Im not that old but new cars really have no appeal to me. Will be interesting to see how it goes hanging onto a 2010 for 50 years

That’s interesting about the mm. Most carpenters (having been one) will measure to the 1/16th of inch, rather than the 1/8th. If you’re cutting trim, sometimes you need a bit more precision. There’s a lingo for that, “11 and 5/16 plus a c* hair.” I suppose metric could be useful to move the job site towards political correctness...

For what it’s worth, 1/16” is also about a saw kerf. But in my experience, that doesn’t really matter because, as I was taught, you don’t take the line, but keep the blade completely on the waste side.

I think the units just don’t make physical sense. Three orders of magnitude between canonical units is just way too much. You always end with either too much precision or too little.

I compute in metric in the lab, and imperial in the garage. Seems to work out just fine. I don’t really see what the big deal is about switching to metric. Adding fractions of an inch is really not that hard.

And until they can get time into base 10 (60 seconds to the minute, 12 months in a year, 24 hours in day??) it all fails on consistency anyway.

Mine is 21, which makes this whole discussion rather humorous to me.

Not really. I used to drive an Saab turbo from the 80s that got close to 30mpg. Old civics pushed 40. 34 mpg isn’t really an improvement over that.

Guess I must be a weirdo. Given a set of stairs next to an escalator, I always the stairs.