Jayschwa

20 ms·

151.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Any tips for rendering text? I'm doing a similar project for Quake 2 with Julia[1]. I haven't tackled text yet, but I probably will need to soon. [1]: https://github.com/jayschwa/Quake2.jl
152.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
This is awesome. Thanks for sharing.
153.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
I quit a fairly toxic job last summer. For about six months, I worked by myself on my own projects. However, I felt my productivity begin to slip, and frankly, not being around people began to weird me out. I'm now in the current batch of h
154.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Or what, exactly? I recently moved to NYC from Iowa and I haven't noticed much of a difference except more aggressive driving.
155.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Having setup a new computer and installed Java on it recently, I found the inclusion of this bloatware very tacky. It's also frustrating because in the past, I have told family members to "just answer yes" to Java update prompts. I'll proba
156.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
vladsanchez 3 hours ago | link [dead] Same boat, Boricua in tech, same traits. Read the article the right way, and liked the anecdotes. Take care.
157.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Look further down the discussion chain. confluence has been telling people to "learn physics" and seems to be equating luck with random chance or determinism.
158.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
This is getting frustrating. Physics being at the beginning of the causal chain does not invalidate latter sections of the chain. If "A → B → C", pointing out "A → B" does not make "B → C" false. A = physics B = individual values and behavi
159.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Your reductionist mindset seems to be on a path of destruction, leaving many useful abstractions in its wake. Is a car actually a car, or is it just a collection of atoms? It's both. Does the car actually drive, or is it just physics? It's
160.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
> We're all just biological machines. Okay, let me rephrase the question. Do you believe that a biological machine's algorithm (i.e. values and behavior) has any bearing on outcome?
161.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Are you suggesting that outcomes are purely the result of random chance, and that an individual's values and behavior have no bearing?
162.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Because "lie detectors" are pseudo-science rubbish. The only thing they test is how well you handle lie detectors.
163.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Stardock deleted the thread after it started to get some attention. Here is a partial screen capture: http://i.imgur.com/R5gs8HC.png Unfortunately, it's missing some of the newer (and frankly, ignorant and cavalier) replies from their tec
164.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Here is a partial screen capture: http://i.imgur.com/R5gs8HC.png Unfortunately, it's missing some of the newer (and frankly, ignorant and cavalier) replies from the tech support guy.
165.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
The poor state of bank passwords is fresh in my head from working on taxes tonight. It's kinda sad that the message boards I use for non-sense are probably more secure than my banks with respect to password handling. That said, I don't thin
166.
Limiting passwords to 12 characters is "secure enough"(forums.stardock.com)
97 points by Jayschwa 14y ago|104 comments
167.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
I find the mentality puzzling as well. It seems to confuse idealism for reality. "X does not happen under ideal conditions, therefore, it is wrong/foolish to prepare for X."
168.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
> The absurd idea that we all each take self defense into our own hands is just ridiculous When seconds count, the police are minutes away. Unless you have your own private bodyguard, being prepared to defend yourself isn't ridiculous.
169.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Having the ability to defend yourself is not "archaic".
170.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
A "smart" holster is an interesting idea. I wouldn't want such a thing mandated by law though.
171.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
This is the first suggestion I've seen that made me go, "Cool!". Mostly because it doesn't involve trying to graft some crazy scanner/computer/tracker onto a gun, which is impractical. There'd probably have to be someone actively monitoring
172.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Homeowner's insurance is to cover the cost of the item. If someone steals my gun and then shoots someone with it, I don't believe the homeowner's insurance will cover that. However, I think that's what kunle had in mind.
173.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Guns need to be as simple as possible so that they are reliable in a self-defense situation. If it doesn't work because the batteries are low or because you're wearing a band-aid on the finger that gets scanned, that's no bueno.
174.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Any proposal that requires a battery pack probably isn't very reasonable. If the gun still works without the on-board computers, then it's too easy to circumvent. If the gun doesn't work without the computers, then you run the risk of it no
175.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Insurance is for covering unexpected events. A gun being fired is a deliberate act. I don't see how it makes sense in this context.
176.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
Any proposal that requires a battery pack probably isn't very reasonable.
177.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
I really like the idea of the Yubikeys, but I had one fail on me after I touched it and experienced a static shock. Another problem is they don't work if the OS is configured to an alternate keyboard layout. The default hex encoding assumed
178.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
I agree completely. Health insurance from employer vs. health insurance from government is a false dilemma.
179.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
You don't appear to be hell-banned (if that's what you're referring to in your first sentence).
180.
by Jayschwa 14y ago
> If we have a chance of stopping a rare, unexpected event that would add quite a lot to the expected value of deaths per year, would it not matter significantly in our efforts of stopping it? I wouldn't characterize the number of death

More ›