Cushman

120 ms·

961.
by Cushman 14y ago
Because it's completely different? Credit cards are designed to be accountable and refundable. The credit card is sold with a guarantee that it cannot be used to steal money from me. They can do this because credit is not "real" money; it's
962.
by Cushman 14y ago
Everybody fucks up their backups at least once. Of course most of us don't keep money on our servers...
963.
by Cushman 14y ago
Their database was deleted and their site has been replaced with a form asking former users how much money they remember having. I doubt very much that anyone is still using the site.
964.
by Cushman 14y ago
Bitcoin has a lot of problems, but this one confuses me. People steal real money all the time; it's one of the things that makes it real money.
965.
by Cushman 14y ago
Ouch. But we've all had moments of forehead-slapping stupidity; I really feel for whoever let this slip through.
966.
by Cushman 14y ago
For single posts, I'd say resist the impulse; it adds noise to the discussion and rarely helps anything. If the error is repeated, then it may be more helpful to correct. Mainly I think we try to just lead by example.
967.
by Cushman 14y ago
You know what's cool? 1.134916 billion dollars. Hey, who else has finances that look like this? Mark Zuckerberg, Trustee of The Mark Zuckerberg 2008 Annuity Trust dated March 13, 2008
968.
by Cushman 14y ago
It's not even suggested. The guidelines are explicit that the original title should be edited or replaced to bring it into line with our community standards. Headlines may be professionally written, but they are written with incentives whic
969.
by Cushman 14y ago
> First, the title should be changed. The source article is titled "Score One for the Robo-Tutors" or "Machine Learning: Score One for the Robo-Tutors", not "Students Learn as Well from Software as from Live Teachers". Where does this i
970.
by Cushman 14y ago
One of the things I've dreamed of using gestures for is controlling behavior (scrolling, navigation, etc.) in a second monitor without changing focus. I hope somebody implements that.
971.
by Cushman 14y ago
We could easily generate enough power for the world using solar, nuclear, or coal, with solar being the longest lasting. What we cannot do presently is store or transmit that power to the point of use in a way which meets current expectatio
972.
by Cushman 14y ago
>The world _will_have_ an energy generation problem. It will not. We orbit a self-sustaining fusion reaction which by definition will last our habitable life. The Earth, at least, is pretty much set. > If it was so absurd then there
973.
by Cushman 14y ago
Indeed-- this is closer to performance art than graffiti.
974.
by Cushman 14y ago
The world does not have an energy generation problem. The world has an energy transmission problem. Fossil fuels are an easy but suboptimal solution to the latter. The premise that this has anything to do with environmentalism is absurd.
975.
by Cushman 14y ago
I smell bullshit. There are a few unjustly felonious fields-- nuclear power, stem cells, and recreational psychotropics are the ones that spring to mind. But in general, government regulation seems an easy scapegoat for the massive extracti
976.
by Cushman 14y ago
So IDEs don't, can't, make programmers more productive enough to offset the cost of developing the IDE itself? I mean, you can think that. But it ain't exactly Moon Science to think otherwise.
977.
by Cushman 14y ago
Maybe you live in a place that has a huge undersupply of janitorial labor, but most people do not and it has nothing to do with whether or not they went to college.
978.
by Cushman 14y ago
I will agree with that the idea that the cult of Lisp started because Viaweb proved that super programming capabilities are better than mere mortals is both wrong and flawed.
979.
by Cushman 14y ago
Wow, man. Did a Lisp eat your cat or something? Maybe you didn't, but a lot of people saw the Light Table demo and thought, "If that thing works right it looks like it might cut my workload in half." This would be the reason (you may have h
980.
by Cushman 14y ago
Hah, sorry. Forgot to read my own writing!
981.
by Cushman 14y ago
While being a part of YC doesn't affect our plans or change our use of Kickstarter as a means of accelerating the release of Light Table, many pledged with the explicit purpose of making sure that it had a chance. With YC that
982.
by Cushman 14y ago
Not necessarily. It's risk of death per unit time; those odds dramatically increase across the board, but it's theoretically asymptotic. We could say "Very slightly decreases the chances that you will live forever."
983.
by Cushman 14y ago
Yeah, they'll change 'em sometimes if the title is too linkbaity or editorializing, usually to the title of the original article or blog post. Recently I've seen a few titles being changed to the source title even when the source title is c
984.
by Cushman 14y ago
Title was: "Graphic: Compare all the Tech I.P.O.'s Since 1980 to Facebook's" That seems strictly superior to me. Who's the editor/bot changing every submission titles back to the article title even when it removes (sometimes vital) context?
985.
by Cushman 14y ago
The normal computer graphics meaning, then.
986.
by Cushman 14y ago
You make some good points, so I hope this doesn't seem dismissive-- my claim is not that the study is right. My claim is simply that the editors of the NEJM decided to publish the study having read it in greater depth than any of us here wo
987.
by Cushman 14y ago
In response to your edit: I think you're saying something very different than what your sibling responded to. The parent's claim was "They didn't correct for X"; your claim is "They tried to correct for X, but we have no way of knowing if t
988.
by Cushman 14y ago
Flash wasn't ridiculed because of how it looked. The principle of integrating interactive content into web pages is a fine one, so long as it's done in a way that's semantically consistent, machine readable, searchable, accessible, reliable
989.
by Cushman 14y ago
Thanks for that. It's a little annoying that every time a study like this comes up, somebody jumps in with "Well, did they control for [obvious thing to control for]?" You don't become a scientist because you're lazy and stupid. If you're r
990.
by Cushman 14y ago
The effect is cool, so I hate to ask this, but-- in what sense is this "photorealistic"? They look like normal soft shadows to me.

More ›