climech

Good points made, but the attitude is absolutely repulsive.

Apologies if I'm reading this wrong, but between this question, and casually comparing a possible origin of life on Earth to a venereal disease, it just all strikes me as very misanthropic.

My answer would be -- it's important if we deem it important, whether that's rational or not. If we start from the premise that life is good, that humans in particular are the most interesting thing out there as far as we can see, then it isn't totally bizarre that we should wish for the show to continue, extend it as far as we can. In that view, being bound to the fate of our home planet seems like an arbitrary restriction.

Pro tip: if you're using Solarized, change to another color scheme before running it.

It's interesting to see how different people deal with different feelings. Personally, when I'm feeling sad, I want to stay with the feeling -- not wallow in it, but let it "flow", so it eventually gets out of my system. Movies can be quite cathartic that way.

I chose "idyllic", expecting titles like Kiki's Delivery Service, but all the recommendations were either fighting or sports-related movies (Raging Bull, Southpaw, Rocky, etc). Sometimes there's also an issue where the same page loads inside the video frame.

Good idea, just needs a little more polish.

The "shake to undo" feature is actually very old, I remember discovering it around 2010. It works in all text fields system-wide, not just in the Notes app!

Veritasium made a cool video about this some months ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRr1kaXKBsU

Thanks! Please open an issue on github if have an account there. System information would be particularly helpful.

Yes, it's sorted by name in natural order. I haven't decided yet which would work best as default (this vs insertion order) -- feedback is welcome. This works well for numbered book chapters, something I personally find useful. In any case, the defaults will be configurable -- when I implement config :)

(Another thing on the TODO list is adding an optional priority score for each task, and sorting those on top of the list in all tree views.)

Without it, the structure allowed the user to create a graph like this:

    [x] Task
     ├──[x] Sub-task (1)
     │   ├──[x] Sub-sub-task (2)
     │   └──[x] Sub-sub-task
     ├──[x] Sub-task (3)
     │   ├──[x] Sub-sub-task (2)
     │   └──[x] Sub-sub-task
     └──[x] Sub-task

prevents diamond shapes

Pretty much this, unless I'm missing something. An earlier version of the program actually used DAGs, but I found it a little underconstrained. I got pretty excited when I discovered multitrees, as it seemed to be exactly what I needed the whole time.

Just SQLite - two tables, one for the nodes, one for edges + some fancy constraints and queries. I was tempted to make a custom binary format, but that's a big task, and it seems to work fine as it is.

As for the syncing, that would be really nice, but I haven't come up with an elegant way to do it yet. Suggestions welcome, if anyone has ideas!

Historic milestone for spaceflight, I don't know what to say. Very exciting times.

I appreciate the good intentions, but confusing Greek readers doesn't seem to me like a good way to honor the cultural impact of Greece.

Absolutely. Personally, I am forever grateful to Sal for helping me overcome my fear of math in my late teens. I started from 1+1=2 and eventually got to Calculus and Linear Algebra (using KA and other resources). I particularly liked the randomized exercises on the site, and how it tracked your progress over time. It became kind of an obsession -- I thought, if I can learn math, I can do anything. I believe Sal's style of teaching had a lot to do with it.

There are tons of other people like me, and it makes me sad seeing such bitterness about a person who obviously brought a lot of good into the world.

I believe something like this would work (excuse the comments normally not allowed in JSON):

    {
      paths: [
        {
          points: [
            [10, 10],  // 0
            [90, 10],  // 1
            [90, 90],  // 2
            [10, 90]   // 3
          ],
          lines: [
            [0, 1, 2, 3, 0]  // connect point 0 to 1 to 2 to (...)
          ],
          curves: {
            0: [5, 15, 15, 5]  // bezier control points for point 0 (x1, y1, x2, y2)
          }
        }
      ]
    }

F9 can only deliver 60 Starlink sats per launch, which would be 685 more launches. (Transporter-1 delivered more because the satellites were lighter/smaller.)

SpaceX is currently developing Starship[1], which aims to increase the payload capacity to about 100,000 kg. The mass of a single Starlink v1.0 is 260 kg[2], which would be 384 sats per launch, although I've seen SpaceX talk about 400. If Starship was operational now, assuming the rate of 400 sats/launch, this would give us 103 more launches for the full constellation. For comparison, SpaceX launched 26 times in 2020, and is aiming for up to 54 launches in 2021[3].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_Starship

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starlink

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Falcon_9_and_Falcon_He...