emn13

28 ms·

211.
by emn13 5y ago
Let me go off on a slight tangent: Should all jokes be taken at face value? Communication is a complex business, and surely what's literal is largely irrelevant; what matters is what is communicated; i.e. what a recipient learns from
212.
by emn13 5y ago
It's those pirates suppressing global warming once again ;-)
213.
by emn13 5y ago
While I agree that a conviction is much better than nothing, I don't share your faith in the accuracy of our criminal justice system, especially if a plea bargain (aka blackmail) was involved at any stage of the process, whether for
214.
by emn13 5y ago
But some of it is just poor UX - like one thing I repeatedly come across in both win10 and win11 iterations of settings is the really poor scrolling UX. First of all, the scrollbar is quite thin and easy to miss entirely. That also makes i
215.
by emn13 5y ago
...but only expose some of the settings, forcing users to go digging through the archeological pit that are older settings interfaces, because windows somehow things the settings they themselves added previously are pointless. Then, ideally
216.
by emn13 5y ago
Not to mention changing materials would likely have continuous costs, and will impact the materials properties and longevity - potentially in ways that just don't add up to a feasible product. And then there's the fact that this i
217.
by emn13 5y ago
Honest question for the purposes of being able to express myself more clearly next time: what makes you believe I think better machines with more sophistication are the answer? I get the feeling (and that's fine!) you're uninteres
218.
by emn13 5y ago
Sure, it's just a particularly amusing case to make on a text-only platform like hacker news.
219.
by emn13 5y ago
That optimism, particularly in this crowd that likely skews towards techies, may be a significant cause of a solid slice of the world's problems today. We sometimes like to see ourselves as little Sherlock Holmes' - humans on a tr
220.
by emn13 5y ago
Yeah, nobody would use a text only communication platform.;-)
221.
by emn13 5y ago
As far as I know - but please correct me if I'm wrong - the amount of waste is small enough that this is irrelevant. Additionally, having radioactive isotopes around is the natural state of affairs; after all, that's the input to
222.
by emn13 5y ago
I stand corrected; I had entirely missed that! I'd misremembered and thought that reviews such as https://www.tomsguide.com/reviews/starlink were more recent; time flies ;-). The caveat here concerning economic vi
223.
by emn13 5y ago
Yeah, that's what I meant - there's a beta out (i.e. a development tool), not a self-sustaining product. The scale is still too small; for this to be economically viable they need to show they can scale much larger and at competi
224.
by emn13 5y ago
However, starlink isn't a product yet . It's hard to separate the hype from reality; so whether starlink turns out to be a practical alternative still needs practical demonstration. Or to put it another way - I'm sure you&
225.
by emn13 5y ago
I'm somewhat skeptical that every radio receiver is interchangable. Yes, starlink will have some kind of transceiver - but do you have any citation to back up the claim that it can be used effectively for astronomical observation? Eve
226.
by emn13 5y ago
That's one aspect to consider, sure. But with all due respect - people have publically tried to analyze this question from all kinds of angles, and there are lots and lots of equally valid extremely indirect bits of evidence, and peop
227.
by emn13 5y ago
That's not fair. But excesses like that are related to the same underlying problem, which is lack of nuance, trust, and honesty in public debate. Additionally, I think you should consider the fact that facebook simply is not a great
228.
by emn13 5y ago
I think this view is overly negative. First of all, consider the timing of this all; this was super early days. People, including many experts, had much less facts then, and the topic was sensitive. I think it's perfectly reasona
229.
by emn13 5y ago
Right, but you're calling into a huge dynamically typed external app, and that may have entirely different conventions for reasons that make sense in that app (here excel). Normally, 30 is crazy. But in excel? Who knows... Also, too
230.
by emn13 5y ago
Build times have regressed considerably the past few releases (at least for me). Not that I'm complaining about the tradeoffs, the new features are generally worth it. Whats most annoying is that it's often hard to tell which fe
231.
by emn13 5y ago
Yeah, the linearity in the dose seems more plausible than the linearity in time; and I don't understand why the two dimensions necessarily would be intrinsically linked.
232.
by emn13 5y ago
People say that, but almost everything brought forward has non-crypto equivalents that are likely superior, and don't involve the opportunity cost of burning large amounts of fossil fuel, and redirecting huge amounts of valuable comput
233.
by emn13 5y ago
I can't find any solid supporting sources that provide any evidence that there exists a positively safe dosage, but even the linear-no-threshold models suggest the effects of low dosages are small enough to be hard to measure; i.e. whi
234.
by emn13 5y ago
To play devils advocate - is that really all that different from much other online communication? A significant chunk of the web runs on advertisements; and those are in essence tons of little influence games, often with little regard for
235.
by emn13 5y ago
Don't worry, legal will answer a completely different question that's unrelated, but rests on a fundamental misunderstanding of the entire premise due to a combination of misinterpreting technical jargon as plain English and then
236.
by emn13 5y ago
This generalizes to "apply a vulnerability-specific tricky auto-fix to a binary it was never tested on". That might be a reasonable solution if there's nothing better (and since speed is of the essence, there might not be).
237.
by emn13 5y ago
Those examples are hilariously egregious, yeah! It's slightly taboo in polite conversation to see increased utility there, yep. Thanks for the kind words, too.
238.
by emn13 5y ago
Yeah, I was struggling the find the best terminology for that, but given the ambiguity of the term "utility" in this context I though it better to avoid that ;-).
239.
by emn13 5y ago
But if the definition is barely more fleshed out than "some cost function", then the difference between utility, priority and equality as discussed in the article collapse; they're all the same thing. Cost functions, aka: uti
240.
by emn13 5y ago
Right, but if the essence of the question is by what function you measure utility, then the question as posed by the article is a moot point. utility, priority, equality - they're just slightly different cost functions for the utility

More ›