HN user
Awwww, someone's scared of thinking. Why don't you just hellban the messenger, it will make it all better ^_^
Generally yeah, but in this case? If they 100% knew for a fact that the sky above his head was black, then adding some black padding is fine. Maybe not from a photography standpoint, but from a journalistic one? Come on..
Oh bullshit.
The flat lens eliminates optical aberrations such as the “fish-eye” effect that results from conventional wide-angle lenses.
Surely you wouldn't claim that is referring to wide-angle thermal lenses?
“In the future we can potentially replace all the bulk components in the majority of optical systems with just flat surfaces,” says lead author Francesco Aieta, a visiting graduate student from the Università Politecnica delle Marche in Italy. “It certainly captures the imagination.”
Oh yes it does. If you help the imagination along with misleading phrasing, that is. If you don't believe me, just read the rest of the comments here, most of them expecting to see some application in photography.
If you get good glass it'll beat the resolution/noisiness of your sensor anyway. Distortion and aberration can be fixed in software quite well; it sure beats waiting that won't come for a long, long time, if even ever.
Don't get me wrong, this is cool for what it actually applies to, but flirting with "capturing the imagination" in such ways gets no respect from me.
Lazyness? Hypocrisy?
But does it really matter? If I had a grandma she wouldn't be using techcrunch, she'd be using facebook.
Funny, now it's obvious that they could have been that evil to start with. I wonder what's changed.
Time passed. Like someone who first makes lewd remarks, doesn't encounter (enough) resistance, then tries for a grope.
I'm surprised that you see politeness and qualification of criticism as "sucking up".
I don't, I see sucking up as sucking up. E.g. If someone says all black people should be killed, do I even have a right to assume they have great, superb, excellent intentions? Should I really start my response with lauding those? Nah. There's limits.
Sure, that's just being fair. And making it clear you're criticizing a thing, not the person who made or said the thing, helps a big deal.
But all that assumes good intentions behind what you criticize. They're all happy feel-good "we're in the same boat here" examples.
How would you criticize extreme greed or callousness? Or blind obedience to state authority, and hand-waving away murder? I've had bitter fights both with someone who kinda glorifed the RAF (Rote Armee Fraktion, not Royal Air Force), as with about anyone I run into on the web who says things like "Assange should be shot on sight, and without trial, traitor blah blah". And then there was this dude on a unmoderated forum who kept mocking someone else for being lesbian and having been raped as a child.
Reacting politely to things like that would have made me feel kinda dirty, you know? Beyond certain points I simply give up trying to change someone's opinion, and try to make it costly for them to have it. There are billions of people, some are complete sociopaths, or are deceived by the same; the more energy you waste on them the less you have for the rest. And being friendly to something disgusting drains me. Attacking it nourishes me. So that's that.
Well, or downvote, the cowardly little brother of negative feedback ^^
But to pad everything with sucking up to a total stranger? Nah. At least not when talking about general or bigger stuff, as opposed to personal suggestions or projects. I show people I care; just not necessarily about them. They kinda have to earn that, first.
I think you make it seem slightly more harmless than it is..
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_will_happen_to_a_person_witho...
After about ten seconds a victim will experience loss of vision and impaired judgement, and the cooling effect of evaporation will lower the temperature in the victim's mouth and nose to near-freezing. Unconsciousness and convulsions would follow several seconds later, and a blue discoloration of the skin called cyanosis would become evident.
At this point the victim would be floating in a blue, bloated, unresponsive stupor, but their brain would remain undamaged and their heart would continue to beat. If pressurized oxygen is administered within about one and a half minutes, a person in such a state is likely make a complete recovery with only minor injuries, though the hypoxia-induced blindness may not pass for some time. Without intervention in those first ninety seconds, the blood pressure would fall sufficiently that the blood itself would begin to boil, and the heart would stop beating. There are no recorded instances of successful resuscitation beyond that threshold.
When 30 minutes of additional breathing are enough time to bring a crew back to Earth or a space station. That is to say, in 340 years, give or take 5 years. By then they'll also bring condoms, because we will have realized that space isn't much good for a whole lot, except to have sex in it.
It's pretty bad... this is the list of blocked stuff from Ghostery:
AddThis Commission Junction Digg Widget etracker Facebook Connect Facebook Social Plugins Google +1 Google Adsense Google Analytics LinkedIn Widgets Pinterest Reddit Statcounter StumbleUpon Widgets Twitter Button
also, this sentence broke my brain: Well what if they really couldn’t “breathe” water” but since the urge to breathe is natural, that must take place…
To me, and I really have to think of the the Simpsons movie when I say this, that just goes to show when you dream a dream, it can also become a website with technology in it. At the end of the day, that's something you can take away from all this, and that's nothing short of okay.
"violating monotonicity means you can’t assume you’ve seen everything once you’ve read to the top of your timeline."
if that turns out to be such a problem,
1.) you can simply assume that everything fresher than 5 minutes is subject to change, so you ignore it until it's at least 5 minutes old.
2.) whatever site or app you're using could simply mark unread messages, and inform you of out-of-order messages.
Feel free. I wish it wasn't true, you know.
How? By constantly downloading the entire database of every application to your local drive? Where it would not only take up space, but could be modified to allow anything in?
Yes, and no.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4427416
(besides, if you can just tamper with the filesystem you're kinda in already)
Too radical.
Here's the quote I was looking for.
"A totalitarian state simply enunciates official doctrine -- clearly, explicitly. Internally, one can think what one likes, but one can only express opposition at one's peril. In a democratic system of propaganda no one is punished (in theory) for objecting to official dogma. In fact, dissidence is encouraged. What this system attempts to do is to fix the limits of possible thought: supporters of official doctrine at one end, and the critics -- vigorous, courageous, and much admired for their independence of judgment -- at the other. The hawks and the doves. But we discover that all share certain tacit assumptions, and that it is these assumptions that are really crucial. No doubt a propaganda system is more effective when its doctrines are insinuated rather than asserted, when it sets the bounds for possible thought rather than simply imposing a clear and easily identifiable doctrine that one must parrot -- or suffer the consequences. The more vigorous the debate, the more effectively the basic doctrines of the propaganda system, tacitly assumed on all sides, are instilled. Hence the elaborate pretense that the press is a critical dissenting force -- maybe even too critical for the health of democracy -- when in fact it is almost entirely subservient to the basic principles of the ideological system: in this case, the principle of the right of intervention, the unique right of the United States to serve as global judge and executioner. It is quite a marvelous system of indoctrination."
-- Noam Chomsky, "Language and Responsibility" (1977)
But of course, that was then, today it's totally different, right? Right.
"Unfortunately, you can't vote the rascals out, because you never voted them in, in the first place." -- Noam Chomsky
I think they mean participation in that you can choose the left or the right lane of the conveyor belt to the butcher house; it's not about addressing actual stuff. You just have to keep up with the newspeak and it all makes perfect sense.
The fact that the parent didn't even raise an eyebrow just makes this butthurt reaction even more hilarious. Keep on trucking, and don't worry; there's an idiot born every day, never mind silly old me. Hahaha.
It's such an outrage! Don't they know that some token glass pearls go a long way?
"Choosing platforms to optimize developer experience enables you to get more features out the door faster"
That is correct in theory, but falls on the face with facebook and others. Unless you literally just mean "more features", and not improving what they're making. E.g. paying for promoted updates so friends see them in their cluttered stream surely is Yet Another Feature, but is it good? I guess it depends on who the market is, here..
If the thing were written in spaghetti code, it would at least mean people would have some time to think in between, or even manage to get out of their 20s before their redefine how grandma keeps in touch.
Still, I'm happy that they improved how their crappy soulless product runs on another crappy soulless product, it keeps them off the street.
Well, it's a cop website -- same difference :P
Well, one the one hand you get a lot of words in the URL nobody will ever search for, especially not concatenated as they are -- on the other hand that page looks to be 9 levels deep from the domain root. I doubt there is an actually good reason, it's just a crappy CMS.
Give it some time.
Yeah. War over iron or diamond I could get, but grassland? Share and enjoy!
But who is talking about "you shouldn't use [whatever]"? The crucial bit is owning and controlling your content - some people aren't thinking much about that. As you said, "The blog gets my best content.", so you're obviously aware of the pitfalls already.
A system like the one that GP proposes, while it could be pretty awesome, would be limited to a very small, extremely homogenous population
How so?
What makes "people who don't want to set up their own domain" homogenous compared to people who want to be first-class citizens of the internet?
Especially once the desire for that is there, it won't be hard to throw money together and run small nodes. Perfect strangers share apartments with each other, we figured that out, so once we realized we really do need webspace, and that it costs money and is complicated, respective services and culture will be established within months. Actually these services already exist for the most part, they just need to get with the OStatus program, and need to be used. Then you order your webspace, 1-click-install your "web presence", done.
And why "extremely small"? We don't even KNOW how many people are running diaspora/ostatus/etc. servers, and how many in total are signed up to them. There is no way, and no need, to count it. You just do what you always do, hold on to interesting people and projects as you run into them.
I don't know about you, but the internet was pretty cool even 10 years ago. I wouldn't mind a little small brother of the "renters social net", with the DIY peeps. Those are not homogenous by any means. They already outnumber Google+ users, I'm sure :P Also, you say "whatever" users - I take it "whatever" means "anything that isn't interoperable via open standards"?
You see, those people can do whatever they want, as far as I'm concerned. Do I listen to Gangsta Rap because X people do? NO.
Same goes for facebook etc. You want to be my cyberfriend, get your sh*t together. You want to read my stuff, or want me to read yours - don't be lazy, or it probably never really mattered in the first place. I don't mind staying in touch with RL friends who are lame when it comes to computers via facebook -- but that's not at all where my attention is, when it comes to the web. I have links on my profile, Every few months I get bored and respond or comment on random things; that's it.
I think this bit from an older article sums it up nicely:
http://www.the-haystack.com/2010/12/17/death-to-web-services...
What if we flipped this all on its head? What if we hosted our own data, and provided APIs for all these webapps so that they can use our data? I can imagine that to be a substantially cool use of RDFa/Microformats and whatever metadata/semantic web technologies you prefer. Isn’t one of the points of the semantic web to make decentralized information meaningful, retrievable and mixable?
So instead of having our own websites aggregate our own data from other people’s websites, we’ll let other people use the data from our own websites. Photos, meaningfully tagged, can be pulled in by Flickr via our own personal API, if you will. We provide the structured data, Flickr provides the functionality. The sharing. The social. Why not?
Personal publishing platforms like WordPress, Drupal, [your favorite here] could be extended to make use of microformatting, RDF, etc. and provide tools for syndication, as we now do with simple blogposts. Services don’t need to host our data. They only need to do cool things with it.
1. Now? http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2056629 Though I'll admit in a way it never gets old :)
2. That's javascript, I wish it was possible with only CSS.
It is safe to assume when I tweet, all my followers will be able to see it immediately.
Unless they do something else with their computer, or are doing some chores in room with the big blue skybox.
And you can only assume this because you know Twitter has fast servers etc. - not because it's a proprietary black box.
The same would hold true for your favourite, lightning-fast diaspora or OStatus pod of choice. Yes, ONLY those followers who ALSO care about super instant real-time speed, will be signed up to fast pods in turn -- but guess what, if you forced them to be on twitter they still wouldn't read, much less react, to your stuff in real-time. So you gain nothing.
Is there a delay when updating to a status to identi.ca before it shows up on rstat.us for example? Have you even tested before you accuse people of "not getting it" --- ??