briefcomment

70 ms·

721.
by briefcomment 7y ago
I would emphasize whenever an analysis has been validated or commented on by the company itself. That elevates the veracity of your analysis from an "amateur blog" level to a "legitimate source for UI examples/successes
722.
by briefcomment 7y ago
I don't know, it's one way to do things. You're signing up for an experience like this. Hopefully you're aware of that. If you're not, and you find you dislike the experience, you can stop without any significant
723.
by briefcomment 7y ago
This looks like it could have promise. I like the presentation. The analysis seems shallow though. It feels like your thought process is, "I have some free time, let's open up this app and see what I enjoy or think is clever, or
724.
by briefcomment 7y ago
It is mentioned as an obvious alternative, however briefly. "What would previously have been marked up to deceit or misjudgment has now been brought into the realm of basic neuroscience."
725.
by briefcomment 7y ago
He's still very lucid, creative, and open-minded. If you have the energy to not get offended by ideas, he's a good read.
726.
by briefcomment 7y ago
I've noticed similar unpleasant changes. I would guess cost is the driver as opposed to aesthetic or physiological preference, but I bet/hope new innovations will make the healthier and prettier solutions financially viable.
727.
by briefcomment 7y ago
True to your first point, but a compromise like having lights be dim and having them increase to full brightness for approaching traffic may help. Selective darkness is certainly a luxury, but there's no reason we can't innovate a
728.
by briefcomment 7y ago
Chronic semi-permanent light at night (street lights, signage, lights from businesses like hotels, porch lights, and notably NOT car lights or other transitory light) is generally unpleasant right? I feel like at best it's an annoyanc
729.
by briefcomment 7y ago
This is fair. I would say though that I am not suggesting that "species are not worth saving". Rather I would define my view as "all species are worth saving, but as human actors, and not gods, we need to pick and choose&qu
730.
by briefcomment 7y ago
To whoever downvoted the above, I don't think we view a town becoming a ghost town as an "extinction". As long as the species still exists, it seems inaccurate to use the term extinct. "Dwindling", "near exti
731.
by briefcomment 7y ago
Unlikely, but possible, so fair. Again though, not really comparable (for us) to human loss. And I'm fine sacrificing "you never know" if we end up using that time and effort for something more pressing, as alluded to by Bu
732.
by briefcomment 7y ago
The use of the "extinct" in this context seems disingenuous then. Probably explainable by the likely fact that "extinct" in a headline will attract clicks.
733.
by briefcomment 7y ago
Ok, but why do we need to do anything to keep certain animal species around? It might be nice to have Sumatran rhinos around so you could see something new and cool, but there are hundreds of thousands of cool species to see. I would gues
734.
by briefcomment 7y ago
Measurements from PurpleAir's network of public sensors are available for free. It's a useful tool if the locals in the area that you're interested in are using PurpleAir's sensors. https://www.purpleair.com&#
735.
by briefcomment 7y ago
Not an extreme example, but Albert Szent-Gyorgi is known for his work with Vitamin C, when his work on bioenergetics and cancer are more interesting and possibly more promising.
736.
by briefcomment 7y ago
The author has been writing for the New Yorker for almost 20 years. He's probably pretty good on his own at this point, concussion or not :) https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/labourday/audio&#x2F
737.
by briefcomment 8y ago
Sound advice. Thinking through the scope of a programming problem to come up with an algorithm sounds like a productive way of using your mind, but may be a waste of time if you don't intend on programming.
738.
by briefcomment 8y ago
Suspected this might be the case, thanks for your thoughts.
739.
by briefcomment 8y ago
Are algorithms useful to learn for a non-programmer? Is there a benefit to thinking through what is presented in a book like this over solving general problems in a day-to-day context?
740.
by briefcomment 8y ago
For 1., looks like any adjective works as opposed to just proper nouns representing places. Also, for 3. seems like all the nouns are plural, so the singular and plural forms don't necessarily have to match.