zethraeus

they're describing building a path based on historical data. that's not UI. It is pretty cool.

This is a hilariously petulant article.

Assuming Apple doesn't explicitly ban analytics collection (and how would that play with fancy mdm solutions?), it sure sounds like it should!

They're not employees but 1099 workers sure sound like they're part of your 'Enterprise'. They could even be 'in house'.

Lots of 1099s actually work in the same building as employees. What makes you think they wouldn't be covered?

Can anyone here speak to AirBnb's continued growth. Rumors say it's plateaued and even public articles suggest the same https://skift.com/2018/11/14/airbnbs-growth-is-slowing-amid-...

it's out of print and amazon merchant bots are being merchant bots.

https://www.empiresofeve.com/

I've listened to the podcast and own the book from their kickstarter. They're both really well done.

I don’t vape and don’t really know common vaping patterns. I will point out, though, that cigarettes aren’t really subdivisble, and humans are remis to waste.

W/r/t definition, the second linked pdf makes reference to measured composition of known bads in vapour:smoke and asserts the ratio is smaller than 1:20. Also refers you to the preexisting literature. https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/360220 That paper defines harms as a combination of health and social factors, with a large weighting towards morbidity.

> It may turn out that e-cigarettes are, on the balance, safer than cigarettes, however it's way too early to make that claim with any level of certainty

Public Health England, which informs NHS policy estimates vaping is 95% less bad for your health than smoking cigarettes.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

I acknowledge that this is an appeal to authority, and that there's valuable research still to be done. But, cigarettes are one of the worst possible things that people habitually do to their bodies. It's reasonable that it wouldn't be hard to do a lot better.

I think it's fair to describe the NHS's public health arm as a decently conservative organization. Public health is a conservative practice after all, and they're decent at it. I read these numbers in that light.

> 'Some flavourings and constituents in e-cigarettes may pose risks over the long term. We consider the 5% residual risk to be a cautious estimate allowing for this uncertainty.'

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

He thinks it's useful as a marketing strategy for his own work.

It's wonderful to see that humanity has so many different definitions of 'sane'. Heterogeneity is beautiful; it makes browsing the internet like walking through a tropical jungle.

... how in the world is that scarier than anorexia?

I don't think that's quite fair.

For example, I've never seen being against factory farming as a conservative platform.

https://quillette.com/2018/11/07/a-world-without-animal-farm...

> I would feel pretty ripped off if I made a big, delicious cake, and as a reward I get one tiny slice while I had to watch everyone else eat the rest. Maybe not if making cakes is just a small hobby for me, but definitely so if it's my career.

this analogy doesn't even begin to approximate the real dynamics.

> So Spotify must compensate for the los[s].

why?

adam@zethrae.us

i'd love to try this

Realistically, profit seeking corporations would hire them. Insufficiently profit seeking corporations will be out-competed by ones that aren't.

They're also not becoming social pariahs outside of, perhaps, the vocal liberal segment of silicon valley.

I bet they'll be fine.

This is a reasonable point to make as a consequentialist with 20/20 hindsight.

But it's fair to value the act of getting freedom from oppressive regimes as a good in itself independent of the power vacuum it creates. And it's fair to assess a movement based on its priors of a possible positive outcome, rather than the purely retrospectively once they haven't come to pass.

Not remotely funny.

I wonder how he'd have fared if he'd drawn anything other than gold courses.

> (it's hard to see how paying people to host your stuff on their own machines can ever be cost-competitive with paying AWS to do it).

The counterargument would be: there are cheaper ways to mine bitcoin than on aws infra. If you can incentivize that with money, you can incentivize storage with filecoin.

You also get censorship resilience (and maybe even better distribution if all goes excellently).

Because they write a lot of code. Because they experiment between a lot of experiences. Because there's a lot of legacy code.

Because it's not an important constraint to them.

Yes. Perhaps consider reading comments in the light of, rather than in order to snarkily make, the obvious points.

Price discrimination is harder to scale than ad targeting.

Does anyone have a sense of what maintenance for a system like this would look like relative to maintenance for a dam? It seems expensive as hell.

and yet they continue to happen. does that give you pause as to the effectiveness of enforcement?

FWIW I was just in london and saw a bunch of people riding their own Mi scooters in the street. (That's the same scooter Bird uses.)

> How they deliberately hire the weak, the afraid, the vulnerable.

[citation needed]

N.B. Patents are a lagging indicator of what a company is doing. They're made public more than a year after submission.

A patent shows only that someone within the organization is supported in thinking about how to do its thing. You can infer a commitment to that thing based on it and/or other context, but it doesn't show that.

>> people shouldn't buy phones from the manufacturers they don't trust.

You're literally hosting your life on it. You should indeed not do this.