dpark

44 ms·

961.
by dpark 11mo ago
> And those implementers should make decisions, Google should be bound by the FTC to supporting their recommendations. Is your proposal essentially that Mozilla defines web standards Google is legally bound to implement them? > what&#
962.
by dpark 11mo ago
Saying web users should define web standards is like saying laptop users should design CPUs. They lack the expertise to do this meaningfully. Web authors? Maybe. WHATWG was created specifically because W3C wasn’t really listening to web aut
963.
by dpark 11mo ago
I kind of liked xhtml, though clearly it was not necessary for the web to be successful. I think the bigger issue is that W3C pursued this to the detriment of more important investments. Reading over the minutes for the last W3C WG session
964.
by dpark 11mo ago
I don’t think they actually said that about xslt at all. From what I saw they basically said usage is low enough that they do not care about it. Can you point to somewhere that Google or anyone else indicated that they would support xslt on
965.
by dpark 11mo ago
The other key browser implementers are also part of WHATWG. Who do you suppose should be in charge of web standards? I can’t imagine the train wreck of incompetence if standards were driven by bureaucrats instead of stakeholders.
966.
by dpark 11mo ago
What high end smart homes are actually smart in the way paxys described? I would say this market more than just not flourishing, actually doesn’t exist. There’s no company that sells this because it would require a whole bunch of other comp
967.
by dpark 11mo ago
“Better specs” is precisely why most laptops are garbage. There is no spec for “months until the screen starts visibly ghosting” or “percentage of the time standby doesn’t happen so your laptop is dead when you need it”. So you end up compa
968.
by dpark 11mo ago
If these 5 little fans do the job as well as a full size box fan, I have to wonder: 1. Are box fans just really terrible? I would expect the amount of airflow from a box fan to absolutely demolish these little case fans. 2. Does airflow not
969.
by dpark 11mo ago
“Works on my machine” is rarely a helpful response. Doubling down with the “skill issue” insult makes it rude in addition to being unhelpful. Two other people were able to concisely explain the problem instead of being rude and condescendin
970.
by dpark 11mo ago
And in that time how many deaths were attributed to laminate glass?
971.
by dpark 11mo ago
This is literally the logic anti-seatbelt folks use. “I don’t wear a seatbelt because if I’m in a crash, the seatbelt could end up trapping me in a fire.” Safety design very often involves trade offs. The chances you get partially ejected a
972.
by dpark 11mo ago
This law is intended to protect belted occupants as well. The target here is rollover crashes where belted occupants may still be jostled partially free from the belt and be partially ejected.
973.
by dpark 11mo ago
That’s totally fair if Adams’s doesn’t do much for you. Regardless, I’m in agreement with you that most landscapes are not actually that interesting without people in them. Humans are naturally drawn to images of other humans.
974.
by dpark 11mo ago
For sure. Selection bias is major here. But I don’t think someone having a negative reaction to this scenario is a 1 in a million chance.
975.
by dpark 11mo ago
I’ve got friends that I’ve known for decades and would fly across the world if they needed. I’ve also got friends I see for drinks occasionally. Other people I might call friends that I don’t even have in my phone. It’s a big range and ther
976.
by dpark 11mo ago
It’s like throwing bacon into an otherwise average recipe. Is it a cheap way to make it good? Yeah. But is it good? Probably. And very plausibly it tastes better than the more difficult recipe that lacks the bacon.
977.
by dpark 11mo ago
Amazing photographers can shoot landscapes that are deeply compelling in their own right. Good photographers really can’t. There aren’t a lot of Ansel Adamses out there.
978.
by dpark 11mo ago
I’m not really sure about that. I think if I told most people in my social circles that, they would look at me like I’m very weird. I’m not necessarily saying they are wrong either. It’s a tough zone. If I imagine people I know saying that
979.
by dpark 11mo ago
> “This photo is not interesting other than the naked woman” My first instinct is to agree with this sentiment. There’s a lot of pretty mediocre photography that gets attention because “naked woman”. At the same time, you could equally s
980.
by dpark 11mo ago
The author is referring to erotic connections and experiences between individuals, not sexualized media. e.g. She mentions examples of having trouble being “in the moment” in new sexual encounters. Consuming pornography does nothing to help
981.
by dpark 11mo ago
> I’m not insulting you. At least own it. Saying someone lacks imagination and creativity and now reading comprehension is absolutely insulting. > I pointed out something interesting. The least thing you could do is actually look up t
982.
by dpark 11mo ago
> I think we are all aware of those trade offs. I'm not sure about that. This type of conversation tends toward "shit's easy syndrome" with complexities hand waved away and real trade offs given lip service considera
983.
by dpark 11mo ago
I generally agree with your assessment. But frumplestlatz also says that literally their smartest engineers are not smart enough to do formal verification.
984.
by dpark 11mo ago
> That's ok, but then you should bow out of the conversation, which is between people that do understand why anyone should want this. I was not making a statement that I am ignorant. I was saying I believe the proposal to model gene
985.
by dpark 11mo ago
If the smartest engineers cannot do it, it doesn’t work. This isn’t even getting to the practical question of whether it’s worth doing, given the significant additional cost. If the smartest folks you can find are not smart enough to use
986.
by dpark 11mo ago
I don’t actually work in Rust. I think I understand what you’re going for, though. The choice to use panic as a way of propagating errors is fundamentally problematic when it can arise from code you don’t control and potentially cannot even
987.
by dpark 11mo ago
So slicing is forbidden in this scheme? But not malloc? This doesn’t seem to be a principled stance on making the language safer. It feels a bit whack-a-mole. “Unwrap is pretty easy to give up. I could live without slicing. Malloc seems ha
988.
by dpark 11mo ago
> as soon as they become the cause of an outage they have invalidated their whole reason for existence This is a bar no engineering effort has ever met. “If you ever fail, even for a moment, there’s no reason for you to even exist.” Ther
989.
by dpark 11mo ago
> we know how to do it better, but nearly all of even the smartest engineers we can hire are not smart enough. This seems like a contradiction. If the smartest engineers you can hire are not smart enough to work within formal verificatio
990.
by dpark 11mo ago
I don’t understand why anyone should want this. Why should normal engineering efforts be held to the same standards as life-critical systems? Why would anyone expect that CloudFlare DDoS protection be built to the standards of avionics equi

More ›