calibration263

When did they not allow SSH apps? I remember using an AppStore SSH app on a first gen iPad about when it came out.

To be more pedantic, it's probably safe to assume this is not even 0dB. Most people would probably consider a computer under 25dB-30dB as "silent" since most rooms background noise are around there.

Linus did a silent PC build which even in a sound proofed case and at idle was about 14dB and broke 20dB under load: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXZrWqCT7R0

Even the high end microphone used to record the sound level in this video produced it's own 7dB of noise.

Using the same algorithm I got 0.175 or so seconds in Java.

Sample code: https://pastebin.com/duYF2QfE

This was on a "Early 2015" rMBP with a 3.1 GHz i7.

Just arm chair speculation, but it seems like any religion that promised happiness or how to be happy wouldn't be wildly successful. Not many people turn to religion when they're happy, and promising happiness to a bunch of sad people isn't going to turn out very well. Telling people that their lives sucks for a reason, we just don't know it yet, and that at least when they die they'll be happier than they could ever imagine is a pretty easy promise to keep to the living. It also gives people hope which in turn can produce happiness or at least a sense of purpose.

Have you tried taking your phone to the Apple Store? I haven't noticed issues like that with mine.

They also happen to be a sponsor of the podcast, so I could understand why he hasn't written a glowing review on DF.

I think that this can be a fundamental shift for the iPhone and iOS without being a paradigm shift that puts apple years ahead of the competition. I also didn't pick up an implication that this puts iOS years ahead of android while reading the article.

I loved that gesture, but I was shocked how many of my friends/coworkers didn't know about it. I think the iPhone X up and over arc is more reliable to trigger(once you figure out not to do up and hold).

How was Apple late to the game with edge to edge displays? They only started appearing on flagships in 2017, this is their first phone release since then. Not to mention most of the "edge-to-edge" android phones are not edge to edge. The S8/Note 8, Pixel 2/2XL, LG V30, and OnePlus 5t all have significantly larger chins and foreheads than the iPhone X. The only thing I think that comes close(and I'd say beats it) is the essential phone.

Getting rid of a physical button is hardly a decent hardware feature. I would've been massively disappointed if apple had gone the android route and just slapped a virtual button i can tap onto the screen.

If you want to say apple ripped some one off with removing the home button, it wasn't android. It was Palm. Welcome back 2009 indeed.

Also related, Tim Cook in a shareholder meeting after a proposal to remove environmental policies/focus: "We do things because they are right and just and that is who we are. That’s who we are as a company. I don’t…when I think about human rights, I don’t think about an ROI. When I think about making our products accessible for the people that can’t see or to help a kid with autism, I don’t think about a bloody ROI, and by the same token, I don’t think about helping our environment from an ROI point of view. ... If you only want me to make things, make decisions that have a clear ROI, then you should get out of the stock"

http://mashable.com/2014/02/28/apple-ceo-tim-cook-climate-ch...

You can also wake the phone up now by tapping the display(similar to the watch). Also it might be configurable in settings but the notification content is hidden on the X when the phone is locked, after FaceID they become visible.

That's not entirely true. The way kitchens are set up/configured, what goes into dishes, how stations are set up, etc can change quite a bit from place to place. Additionally there's usually kitchen slang/words for most items on the menu which need to learned.

Also I've had many dev interns at my company, it takes work on my end to enable them to be productive quickly, but it's not impossible. Maybe you need to write some skeleton code for them to fill out and unit test, maybe you need to document things well and spilt up your tasks well, but you absolutely can have some one come in and be productive day one.

In fact my interview was a college hire group interview, we were given a laptop with skeleton code in multiple languages, a problem to solve with fixed inputs. The problems were similar to what you'd likely encounter for whiteboard coding, except I got to be left alone with a computer, the internet, and my editor of choice to write actual code to solve the problem.

I'm not going to do free work for you

Our industry could follow after the restaurant industry and implement stages/trialing. You come in and work a full day. If you get the job that days pay shows up on your first paycheck, if not they send you out the door with a check.

Before the AirPods came out I had a pair of Jaybird X2's. For me at least being able to hang them around my neck when not in use did not help keep from losing them, it's the REASON I lost them. I lost my Jaybirds in about a month and a half, after having them fall off my neck without me noticing multiple times. They fell off my neck on my walk to/from work at least 4-5 times before I finally didn't notice in time to get back to them before they'd be grabbed up.

My AirPods however I've had since January/February and I still have both. I have never gotten close to losing them the 4-5 times I did with the Jaybirds, because instead of dangling around my shirt/jacket, they go back in the case and into my pocket the second they come out of my ear. I've had some cases where I misplace them at home of course, but they're not just jumping out of my ears, and if they did I'd surely notice my music/podcast stop playing.

I also have found earbuds that are actually wireless(not wired bluetooth earbuds) has been a huge improvement. For example if I pull one out, I don't have a wire hanging and pulling on the other bud uncomfortably. If my buds are getting low, I can recharge one at a time without having to stop my podcast/music. They're also massively more comfortable, the Jaybird wire was kind of tacky and would catch and move jumpily on my neck, putting on a hoodie/jacket would pull on the cable or knock them out of my ears, and putting it in front of my neck was even more annoying. (Constantly having something moving and bumping against my chin was super annoying). Bluetooth wired earbuds are fine, but after having used what was widely regarded at the time as the best pair available, using wireless earbuds makes them feel like a cheap stopgap.

Treating people different based on their gender(or race) is kind of the definition of descrimination. That said, equality shouldn't mean a loss of civility, politeness, or hell even being romantic. It also doesn't mean treating everyone uniformly. Once you get to know some one or grow closer with them and learn their likes and dislikes, obviously you'll treat them differently. However when you don't know them well you shouldn't default to method A for men and method B for women.

As some one who took a sociology 101 class in junior college... nothing in his memo is original/new/insightful. This is a classic nature vs nurture argument.

Your article states 87.7% efficiency in gasoline refining.

Energy density of gasoline is 34.2 MJ/L: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density

This means there was 4.8 MJ of energy spent to create 1L of gasoline. The 70kWh(250MJ) tesla is reported to have 390KM range. 4.8 MJ would be 1.92% of the range, or about 7.5km. The Mazda 3 has a combined fuel economy rating of 33 MPG, which is about 14KPL.

As far s I can tell, your statement that an EV can go further on the power needed to refine a gallon of gas, than an ICE car can drive is off by a factor of almost two.

That said, arguing an electric car can go a certain distance based on inefficiencies of another unrelated process is not a very meaningful argument. You need to look at the efficiencies and CO2 produced for drilling/transporting/refining/burning gas vs producing/transmitting/storing/using electric power, and probably the costs of dealing with peak loads vs non-peak loads, and even then the argument is heavily weighted on where your power comes from.

A lot of these I don't think are different phrasings, they're different in meaning as well.

A closer rephrasing with similar sentiment is: "No one cares"

All the phrasing you provided are combinations of: 1) not applicable to me/us 2) we can't do anything about it

For anyone struggling with empathy, imagine you're feeling frustrated with something, you share with your coworkers, one replies publicly "no one cares" and everyone else laughs. Then the next day the thing that was frustrating you happens a number of times and you can't say anything because it's clear that everyone doesn't care.

It's not about who reads it, it's about who has access. If a system has access to read my email as plain text, it means anyone who owns or can get access to that system can read my email.

Some one wrote fread, it could've been john, and john absolutely could be reading your email. Look at the what happened with ubers god mode.

That said the value of gmail for me exceeds the risk of people I care about reading my email getting access or having access. However my(and probably your) subjective view on the value of your emails is absolutely subjective.

But, if society doesn't find a way to retrain(invest in) those people that were replaced we lose all the potential they had to offer.

Since this article is specifically about amazon and FC employees, I think it's relevant to point out they have a program to do just that. Career Choice pre-pays up to $12k in tuition towards degrees/certificates for an in-demand trade/field, and up to 95% reimbursement on books: https://www.amazon.com/p/feature/fsp92a2bhozr3wj

+1TB 960 Pro SSD : $600 +8 core Xeon E5 could go anywhere from $500 to $2000+ depending on clock rate and generation. + Pricing on Vega hasn't been announced yet, but the Apple keynote mentioned 11 Teraflops, which is competitive with a GTX 1080Ti. Say AMD undercuts that, and it's $700. + A X99 motherboard will run you around $300. + A 10G network card is another $200 at least. + 32GB of DDR4 2666 ECC is about $400.

A 5k panel off newegg(only one I see) is $2000, but I know you can at a minimum buy the LG one off apples site which is $1300.

That brings you up to $4000 as a low estimate(lower end E5, 16GB of RAM, low estimate on GPU).

You'll still need to throw in a power supply($150 at least), a case(Say $100), most likely cooling for the CPU and case fans(Another $100), mouse and keyboard(Say $100 for nice but not great).

That gets you up to at least $4,450, and it's unlikely you'll have 4 Thunderbolt 3 ports, a card for that likely won't be cheap either. So $5k for this, depending on Vega pricing, and what CPU is actually in there, sounds fairly reasonable.

That all said I don't need server hardware, and you probably also don't. $2k on a i7 7700K or i5 7600K, a GTX 1070 - GTX 1080TI, a 512 850 Evo, a 1440p panel, 16GB of non-ECC ram, is what feels like the price/performance sweet spot right now, and Apple isn't in that market. That doesn't mean though this product is overpriced.

It's not just about wether a machine can do something better than a human. Firstly you need to account for costs. If a machine can do it perfectly, but a human can do it 80% as well for 40% the cost, the human still has a job. The cost to hire the human is heavily tied to the economy and their cost to live, which actually ties back in to how expensive/accessible things are. You'll notice that there's still a lot of manual assembly in manufacturing today for this reason. Secondly there are a massive number of social issues. When a person does something wrong it's a mistake, when a machine does something wrong it's broken/unreliable/unsafe. So it can't just do something better than a human, it has to do it exponentially better and much cheaper(including maintenance/development/switching costs).

Maybe that's possible, but this blossoming we have as AI today is nothing like that. Knowing how we do AI today and the fundamental difference between general purpose AI, which is very stupid, and extremely specialized AI, which is very smart but only useful for very specific things, gives me zero confidence that the recent AI developments are headed towards an AI that's cheaper/smarter at everything than your average joe.

Take a look at all the voice assistants. They're very good at some specific tasks(they aren't general purpose, and they fail at super basic things. These failures can be addressed, but Siri isn't going to learn them on it's own, some one needs to program new features still. As an example, say my wife name is Jane, and there's another Jane in my address book. If I asked a human assistant to call Jane and let her know I had a meeting and I'd be home late, and they said "Do you mean Jane Doe or Jane Smith?", or forced me to say "tell my wife" otherwise she wouldn't do it, I'd fire her. The human assistant understands that "home" is where I live, and the only person who would care when I got home named Jane is my wife. Also when they called my wife and my wife asked when I would get home, they would think to check my calendar for the meeting I had mentioned in the message, if it was there tell her how long the meeting ran, and then even people able to figure out that there'd be some transit time. They might even think to ask wether or not I was going to grab something to eat before I got home since they might know that sometimes when I stay late I get a sandwich at the cafeteria and that my wife doesn't need to wait for me to have dinner.

Identifying that "text" means send an SMS, and that the next could words need to be searched in my phone book, and the remainder is the message, is not general purpose AI. It's some voice recognition with some fuzzy matching and is not that far off from SmarterChild. All the connections a human assistant can intuitively figure out in todays "AI" need to be programmed in. They need to know to look for those variables, and make relations between them. If we stop developing Siri, she will never learn on her own to make those connections or look at those variables.

Finally, the idea that if machines can do everything we do today, there will be nothing left to do is the definition of the lump of labour fallacy. Just like everything else with technology in the past, reducing the cost to produce X increase the availability and accessibility of X, reducing the number of people who had to work on X, and allowing people to instead start working on new things Y, or to do interesting awesome things with X that weren't possible when X was scarce, creating industry Z.

Unless once AI is invented there is literally nothing else new we can create, I think we're okay. And I don't think AI will be out-inventing or out-creating human beings in me or my great grand kids lifetime. There's just no precedent I can see that this is happening.

tl;dr: our AI suck, AI will make things(and subsequently labor) cheaper, AI will enable us to focus on new things, AI will create new industries of jobs.

The majority of my US History classes in high school focused on things like the trail of tears, the pullman strikes, Jim crow laws, Vietnam war atrocities, Japanese internment, our policies towards European refugees during WWII, the watergate scandal, the US invasion of panama, the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima... I learned about all of these as part of a standard public school education, just like all my peers. Plus you'd be crazy if you thought US media was bullish about Guantanamo, the missing weapons of mass destruction, NSA civilian spying, drone assassinations...

Regardless wether people care about those things(a lot don't), it's part of our education and media. I think the claim is Chinese history classes in china and their media are a bit more rose colored than ours, which is why people don't know about tiananmen square.

"Compare that to the modern AIs outperforming highly trained doctors in diagnosis."

This sounds exactly the same as automation replacing skilled labour. Lots of things today that we take for granted used to highly skilled markets. Things like clothing, pottery, furniture, etc all used to be highly skilled trades where people would learn the craft through apprenticeship over potentially decades. The cost of these items was massive compared to today, most of them being items a families would save up for years to a afford and keep for a lifetime. While now the production of these goods are available cheaply to everyone, and there's massive industries around them.

Imagine a world where all you needed for an accurate medical diagnosis was a smartphone? Maybe the only doctors that remain are some highly trained specialists, but the number of nurses needed would skyrocket. The barrier of entry for a general practitioner could be much lower. The families who debate wether or not to feed their family or go to a doctor to ask about that cough they've had for 2 months which won't go away will disappear.

I think you're correct. Pure gold is extremely hard to dissolve or oxidize. There's three common methods, using a mercury amalgam(which is an alloying, so the gold is still unreacted), cyanide, or a mixture of hydrochloric and nitric acid called aqua regia.

I think this is to deal with products/parts which aren't available in different regions. As some people have mentioned, getting a keyboard replaced in a different region that has different keyboards isn't possible(unless you accept the keyboard used in that country).

Similarly if your power brick dies, you can't expect an apple store to carry power bricks for all possible outlets(especially with the iPhone style bricks that don't have removable prongs).

Still sounds like you'll get supported to that countries ability to support you.

This analogy works pretty well. The door gives both secrecy and privacy. If you want to keep people from doing drugs in the bathroom (their secret) you'll have to give up some privacy(people seeing things they know you're doing).

I was worried I was the only one!

To use your example, portrait painting was essentially killed by photography. If you were a painter, or are trying to be a painter today, things don't look great.

However what you haven't addressed is the impact of reducing the human labor cost/skill to producing portraits. Historically painting portraits were prohibitively expensive, likely most people never had a painting/portrait of themselves or their family. The introduction of photography enabled everyone to have photos of themselves, their families, their children growing up, their wedding. In terms of labour, we started doing things with photos that only the richest people could have afforded to do with paint. Just think of how many mall photography shops there used to be in the early 90s. In the long term we wound up with a higher quality of life by making something that used to be expensive accessible, while still maintaining a large number of jobs. Just not if you're a painter.

tl;dr, automation is bad for the individual, but good for society.