steamer25

I agree it's not worded well. I think they might have intended to mean a jab at U.S. surveillance dragnets via the Snowden affair.

One pattern I've heard (I think previously via Hacker News) is to start with a mobile design and progressively enhance the site for browsers with grid support. That way, older browsers fall back to the same experience as the mobile design.

> Evidently, the costs associated with using an orm are greater than the benefits for someone who is fluent in SQL.

I largely agree although I've recently discovered the beauty of re-usable, type-checked sub-clauses by composing C# lambda expressions for Entity Framework using e.g., AndAlso():

https://stackoverflow.com/a/13968172

That was my thought. It seems like it'd be similar to enforcing fractional reserve bank loans--audits and accountants and judges to determine if people are colluding, etc. It also seems similar to anti-trust.

Another possibility might be something like a tax on hoarding large amounts of food e.g., each day it sits around without being sold or consumed past some grace period like one year. Maybe only tax profits achieved by hoarding food, similar to long term versus short term capital gains, unless you sell after a crop failure.

I think what he means is that he's defining 'concurrent' as a sort of abstract parallelism which can run on 'n' CPU cores. It becomes concrete parallelization when you set n to 2 or more but can still be considered concurrent software architecture even if someone only ever runs their copy with n=1.

To address another comment, I agree this distinction has limited utility (assuming I understand it correctly). This context of discussing architectures which promote abstract parallelism is probably about the only place it's useful.

I agree that a strict/true interpretation of 'concurrency' (as distinct from Pike's definition) would not include time slice multi-tasking since it depends on the limits of human perception to appear as truly-concurrent/executed-in-parallel when it's actually fine-grained sequential processing.

My Costa Rican brother-in-law was just telling me that a couple Central American countries are working on new canals because the Panama canal is fairly saturated.

If I'm interested in a particular show, I usually use https://justwatch.com to see which streaming service(s) carry it.

Once that's narrowed down, it's usually not a problem to pull up the respective app and start the show. Something integrated might save the redundant in-app search but that's probably less than one minute of the average 45 minute viewing session.

I don't remember why I dismissed liquibase when I was looking at the options. Maybe it was seeing that 'Role-Based Authentication' is only supported in the paid version? I ended up getting most of what I needed out of pgquarrel although I think I ended up manually maintaining the auth parts anyway. If/when it comes up again, maybe I'll take another look at liquibase.

Ultimately, yeah, I just got better at keeping track of the changes myself as in the article you link in your GitHub README: http://www.liquibase.org/2007/06/the-problem-with-database-d...

dbeaver-community does the day to day stuff really well. One great feature is built-in SSH tunneling. There are also frequent updates.

The only thing I haven't been able to find a great solution for yet is comparing schemas between DB instances and generating DDL to make up the difference.

I find the following to be of consistent enough quality to subscribe. Mostly ones that might not already be listed:

Electronics: https://www.youtube.com/user/greatscottlab

Fun and practical making https://www.youtube.com/user/iliketomakestuffcom

Music theory/guitar: Signals Music Studio https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRDDHLvQb8HjE2r7_ZuNtWA

Hacking/reverse software engineering: Live Overflow https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClcE-kVhqyiHCcjYwcpfj9w

Cooking: https://www.youtube.com/user/BrothersGreenEats

https://www.youtube.com/user/FrenchGuyCooking

Physics simulations: https://www.youtube.com/user/EugeneKhutoryansky

Science: https://www.youtube.com/user/1veritasium

Civil/structural engineering: https://www.youtube.com/user/gradyhillhouse

More than you ever wanted to know about woodworking. Also some engineering: https://www.youtube.com/user/Matthiaswandel

Engineering: https://www.youtube.com/user/engineerguyvideo

Cinematography https://www.youtube.com/user/everyframeapainting

I actually didn't realize that the notes of the major scale and it's modes were contiguous on the circle of fifths until seeing guitardashboard.com last night. That's what the down one, up five is saying.

A fifth is seven semi-tones above the root. It has a 3:2 frequency ratio to the initial note. It so happens that if you jump up by seven semi-tones five times, you've got most of the major scale, albeit strewn over 3 doublings of the initial frequency. Usually, the major scale is thought of as occurring within a single doubling so in the key of C you'd have to divide the frequencies D and A by 2; E and B by 4 to get back into the original n<->2n range. Any time you double or halve the frequency you get a note with the same mood/purpose/name but one octave higher or lower. The frequency ratios end up something like this:

C = 1

G = 3/2

D = (3/2)(3/2) (/2 to get back to the initial range)

A = (3/2)(3/2)(3/2) /2

E = (3/2)(3/2)(3/2)(3/2) /2/2

B = (3/2)^5 /2/2

There's one note missing, though--the one with a 4:3 frequency ratio: F. To get that one, we invert the 3/2 relationship and take the frequency that's 2/3 of our initial frequency. That's in the halved range, n/2<->n, though so we've gotta double to get back into our starting range. This is the one time we go down seven semi-tones instead of the five times that we go up.

I'm not sure how useful it is to think in these terms but it does show that you can derive the major scale by using simple ratios which, psycho-acoustically speaking, are generally considered more pleasant than complex ratios when played at the same time. The relationship between B and C, (3/2)^5 == 243/32 is already pretty tense. E.g., you could alternate between two notes with that ratio to make it sound like Jaws is lurking somewhere nearby:

https://youtu.be/BX3bN5YeiQs

Sticking with the simpler 3/2 makes it sound like Superman is here to save you so you can relax:

https://youtu.be/e9vrfEoc8_g

Each doubling of frequencies is divided into twelve somewhat evenly-spaced semitones. If you go up seven out of twelve (using index 0 for your initial frequency), that's essentially half way to the doubling of the frequency with a ratio of 3:2. E.g., if your starting frequency is 440, going up seven steps will give you a note with a frequency of 660.

Another way of dividing up the space between a frequency and it's doubling uses eight of the twelve semi-tone divisions . The eight notes form an 'OCTive'. The octive has a 1-based index for the starting frequency. You can see seven out of twelve highlighted notes in the dashboard circles . The eighth note has the same name as the first one as you complete the circle but it would either be double or half the frequency. Going up seven semi-tones using the twelve division 'chromatic' scale is the same as going up five steps in the more selective eight note octive scale.

Yes, the circle continues from 2n<->4n and 4n<->8n and n/2<->n and n/4<->n/8 etc. The boundaries are those of human hearing from about 20hz to 20khz.

The white keys on a piano are the key of C Major. The black keys are the 'accidental' notes--the five notes of the twelve division chromatic scale that are discarded when selecting the notes for the eight (7 + the 1st/8th note that is counted twice to complete the circle) note octive.

I think jules means to consider how many millions of dollars and euros and hours and hours were spent developing the modals for thousands of different websites and how that money might have been better spent.

Not a book but here are some recently published debates between Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris that are moderated by Bret Weinstein:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-Z9EZE8kpo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtkwF5qA6uE

I haven't gotten around to watching them yet (4.5 hours total) but they're supposed to be pretty interesting. The topic of the debate, as I understand it, is roughly whether religion or religious beliefs have any utility from an evolutionary/fitness perspective and/or to what degree could/should we try to objectively evaluate religious/ethical beliefs. Peterson is a clinical psychologist so he's coming to the debate from that angle.

Yeah I could imagine an article coming from the opposite direction, deriding ivory tower calculations in favor of real world experimentalism in some case where the developers didn't do enough physical testing. There are definitely plenty of cases where design mistakes have been unaddressed to tragic consequences: poor modeling in the Hyatt Regency collapse (https://youtu.be/VnvGwFegbC8), underspecified gusset plates causing the Minneapolis bridge collapse and possibly the novel methods chosen for the recently collapsed Florida pedestrian bridge, etc. Ultimately, the methodology is probably less important than whether the business chose to recklessly defraud people about the risks and safety concerns or acted in good faith.

This reminds me a bit of atomic orbitals and how they're based on spherical harmonics. I was curious why there were e.g., eight electron 'sockets' in the second shell. Eight seemed like a very arbitrary number to me and my high school chemistry teacher's inability to explain at the time did it's share to put me off chemistry.

Many years later I remembered my old question and started looking it up. It turns out that eight is the sum of 1+3+3+1 perhaps similarly to what's in the article.

Spherical harmonics ends up giving rise to a three dimensional 'overtone' series (borrowing from my understanding of music theory). In the first order there's only one mode of vibration. In the second order there are three additional modes. The summands above are something like positive and negative degrees of freedom for each mode in the second shell.

Here's a diagram of what the modes look like in each order:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/OkDYbIhisZE/maxresdefault.jpg

...and here's an animation of a sphere undergoing the differing modes of vibration:

https://youtu.be/EcKgJhFdtEY

If I understand correctly, the math related to atomic orbitals can be described with 3 dimensions of space: x, y and z plus one more orthogonal dimension of frequency/time which would mean quaternions would be most directly applicable?

> the CIA has shot down democratic regimes to enforce small-government-free-market policy in developing countries when these policies are rejected in polls

I haven't read the book but from another perspective it sounds like the CIA shot down democratic regimes in developing countries to enforce policies favorable towards U.S.-based internationally big, militarily market-intervening government that were rejected in the local polls. I wouldn't be surprised if there were extra-governmental industrial interests that benefited as well.

In a recent video, Ryan Dahl mentioned that he regrets incorporating package.json and NPM into Node:

https://youtu.be/M3BM9TB-8yA?t=588

He has a very early attempt at breaking from compatibility with Node called "Deno". Here's the part in the video about his current thoughts on importing external modules under Deno:

https://youtu.be/M3BM9TB-8yA?t=1257

He has some other security proposals as well.

Yeah it seems analogous to bike shedding or Paul Graham's 'blub' paradox. I.e., "we don't understand that and haven't [realized that we've] needed it to date therefore it's probably not important and certainly not of interest".

I like your conservation-of-mental-energy interpretation.

FWIW, I read the article and found lots of hand-waving. Strong counter-examples came quickly to mind for most of it's claims.

It's saying pretty much the same thing as, "Think of how productive the world would be if there were no more crimes or wars! What if we stopped having police or armies!" Yup--that sure would be nice but I'm not going to hold my breath.

Yes, I've often thought we can't all live in North America* but we could all live like Americans if the freedom loving peoples of the world were given a chance to import the better parts of our culture. E.g., what if the Mexicans who thought that becoming an American would be better than remaining Mexican all moved to northern Mexico, seceded and tried to live like they were the 51st state. They could adopting the U.S. Constitution, etc. and make friendly overtures. Even if the U.S. didn't annex them they could probably pull favorable trade status and military alliances while retaining local self-government.

*This is a little melodramatic but it gives one a good sense of the scale of the problem with trying to bring everyone to western countries: https://youtu.be/KCcFNL7EmwY

Prior to reading the article, I'm struck by the thought of a possible analogy:

An internet with no firewalls and free, unauthenticated root access would be $78T richer.

I've been using react-native-navigation from Wix. The documentation is a little sparse but so far I've gotten it to do everything I need it to do.

Dot dot is range notation: https://doc.rust-lang.org/rust-by-example/flow_control/for.h...

Here's the reference for the drain() method on vectors which takes the range argument: https://doc.rust-lang.org/rust-by-example/flow_control/for.h...

Altogether, it sounds like (I haven't read the whole thing) it's supposed to drain from the current row until the end, including every row in between.

+1 for text explanations.

I have a decent internalized understanding of western music theory and it's application on guitar but it seems like it would be a pain to try and decode the meaning of all of the colors, polygons and icons. Even if I did spend significant time on that, I fear I'd still be left wondering if I was missing some of the insights you might be trying to convey.

For the time being, it might be useful to just provide a key/legend where each term links off to some third party site that already has an explanation of the respective term.

Also, it'd be good to explain what the different views are good for. E.g., what's the difference, when viewing A-minor pentatonic, between the scaler view vs the pentanizer view?

FWIW, I'm on a moderately aged Android phone. If there's more to the desktop experience (e.g., hovertext?) it'd be good to add a note saying so.

I was thinking they need to start recording and widely publicizing exit polls using the approval system so that people can get a sense of what the alternative 'feels' like. The big problem is that it'd take at least ~three election cycles for most people to appreciate the difference it'd make.

E.g., in the first cycle, extreme candidate A wins the actual election while the moderate, B, is shown to be widely tolerated under the approval system. Nearly half the voters--those who voted for the opposite extreme, C, end up loathing the results of the actual election and wishing in retrospect that the approval system had been in place. Perhaps in the second election cycle, candidate A wins re-election because they're a known-quantity/incumbent.

Finally, in the third cycle, history starts repeating itself and people get tired of A's party. E.g., the Overton window slides back towards C's perspectives leading to C being seated. This time the people who still prefer A are disgusted with the outcome and prefer the outcome of the approval system.

At this point, half the voters have long argued that the approval system makes more sense and the other half has also come around to thinking maybe it could bolster their position as well. It'd only remain for less partisan activists to e.g., get a petition going towards a referendum.

Theoretically, I'd think you could just wrap most of the central compartment(s) with a (permanent/sealed/static) vacuum chamber--like a big thermos.

http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/energy-soluti...

3Blue1Brown has a good series on YouTube for building intuition in linear algebra:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLZHQObOWTQDPD3MizzM2x...

In one of the last videos in the (relatively short) series, he discusses eigen-*:

~'eigen-stuffs are straight-forward but only make sense if you have a solid visual understanding of the pre-requisites (linear transformations, determinants, linear systems of equations, change of basis, etc.). Confusion about eigen-stuffs usually has more to do with a shaky foundation than the eigen-things themselves'

https://youtu.be/PFDu9oVAE-g

All of the videos in the series, including this later one on eigen-things, focus on animations to show what the number crunching is doing to the coordinate system.

> The fundamental unit of Music Theory is the Interval (as in "frequency interval between notes"). A better explanation would have explained Intervals, how particular combinations of Intervals form

Guess what... A perfect fifth is a 3:2 ratio/interval of frequencies (+/- a small allowance for the historical/mechanical constraints that lead to well/equal tempering unless we're talking modern micro-tonalism in which case no adjustments are necessary). The inverse, 2:3, is a perfect fourth.

The example frequencies I gave correspond to concert-A, then E and D. I took a very simple/short path from intervals to harmonic function/progression to try to give a taste of the meat and potatoes before providing a link to additional sources.

I avoided music theory terms because that would've been a circular definition for any readers who had no understanding of even the basics.

In light of your post, I should've added a sentence or two about mood (major = happy, diminished = tense/scary) and compared that to how you can make a 'warm' picture using reds, oranges and yellows or a sombre picture with darker colors, etc.

It's more about the ratios than the example frequencies I provided. That's more apparent if you play an instrument with an exposed string and a finger-board but still true if it's hidden under e.g., the hood of a piano. The definition of consonance versus dissonance is basically whether or not the ratio is simple. The overtone/undertone series from which the various scales are derived is also one only one logical step away. One step past that gets you to diatonic harmony which leads to harmonic progression/retrogression which makes up the bulk of my theory text book and the real gist that I was getting at.

If you can provide a better overview or point out how it's anything more than a bunch of terms/shorthand for sonic patterns, I'd love to be informed.