1
point
zenexer
Joined 3,990 karma
- zenexerIt's seemingly everything. SES was the first one that I noticed, but from what I can tell, all services are impacted.
- It's hard to say because I can't see when you're clicking, but that looks snappier than what I'm seeing. I'll comment further in the issue and attach a screen recording of my own.
- No, there's no chance I'm mixing them up. It's Element X from the App Store. The app label is "Element X".
If I'm using a mobile app, chances are I'm on-the-go. I probably have a slow, high-latency, or otherwise unreliable connection. It's possible it comes down to protocol differences that hinder UI responsiveness.
Edit: As a test, I just sent a message from my phone while on a cell connection with good service. Hitting the send button felt unresponsive: it took a bit for the message to appear in the chat history (maybe 100-200ms). That's on a stable 300 Mbps connection mere miles from my homeserver.
For contrast, Telegram doesn't wait to clear my text area. I can queue further messages to send even if my first hasn't gone through. Same for Slack and Discord.
- I disagree--it doesn't feel resolved. I've been trying to use Matrix for so long now, and just recently gave another shot at helping my partner get up and running with Element X on her M4 iPad.
It's still so clunky and so difficult to get off the ground. To start, E2E key verification just wouldn't work on Element X; she had to install Element, verify my key there, and go back to Element X.
That would be easy to overlook if the UI felt responsive and snappy, but it doesn't. It feels far from native. I don't know if it's Electron under the hood--I haven't checked--but it sure feels like it. It feels unresponsive in the same way as a stereotypical bank app, like walking through Jello. Maybe it's a protocol issue; I'm not sure.
I've got a nice, powerful homeserver running, waiting for love, but it will continue waiting until such time as there's a responsive client. Every month or two, I upgrade it and give it another shot, but I always end up back on a mix of Telegram, WhatsApp, Slack, and Discord. None of my work or social circles are willing to make the switch when it feels so slow.
- It might be a standard, but for a long time the licensing costs were exorbitant, and that likely stifled adoption. While licensing costs have come down, the pushback against HEIC’s pricing led to the development of better, royalty-free alternatives—including JPEG XL. Thank god they went with an unencumbered standard this time.
- Because the participants could very easily spread it to other people. This wouldn’t just affect them. That’s why the trial was ultimately required to take place under quarantine.
It’s not even a question of whether it would spread, but whether it might spread. There’s a reasonable chance that this bacterium would, in fact, spread, and nobody has proven otherwise.
The FDA is doing its job here: it’s protecting the masses from people who believe they’re just consenting for themselves.
- I often go to Barnes & Noble to sit and work on my laptop with a coworker. They have nice seats, no shortage of reference material to settle debates, and happen to be in closer proximity to my office than a library.
One cold winter day, as I was typing out a rough design for a major project, I decided it was just too tedious to work that way. My hands were cold, typing hurt, and my fingers couldn’t keep up with my head. I was trying to track all sorts of interdependent services in my head.
I got up, grabbed a notebook and pen from the shelves, and walked to the checkout counter. Coincidentally, both were Moleskine-branded, but to this day, I know nothing about the company. All I know is that it was far less frustrating to scribble crude diagrams on paper than it was to type them up.
Once I got everything down on paper, I still had to type it all. The scribbles were barely legible to me, let alone the other people on my team.
Pen and paper didn’t replace digital; rather, they augmented it.
- That seems unlikely. This is a civil spat between Sony and Cox, without the involvement of the government beyond what's necessary for them to preside over the court case. The investigative burden falls on the two private entities.
They can go around convincing government A to extradite random person B to jurisdiction C over their civil disagreement, especially when that would have severe consequences for random person B.
- > People who download pirated stuff no longer have to fear being sued and forced into an expensive settlement.
That's certainly not true. Nothing prevents Sony from suing these people. They could go to court, present evidence, get a court order, and go after these people the same way they always have. They don't seem to want to do that, probably for a variety of reasons. It's awfully convenient if you can scare service providers into enforcing your will without all that pesky "evidence" nonsense.
If you're referring to laws like DMCA and CDA, those provide safe harbor to the likes of websites and hosting providers that serve user-generated content. They don't provide safe harbor to the individuals responsible for posting that user-generated content. You're still on the hook for what you post online, and Sony could sue you. Nothing stops them from doing so.
- Well, they probably would cut you off—but it would be with a court order. And that’s how it should work.
There’s no due process here, and that’s a problem. Sony is saying that they should be entitled to tell your ISP to cut you off without a court order. That should be scary.
It’s no different from Sony arguing that they should be entitled to tell your power company to shut off your power because they believe you’ve watched a Blu-ray Disc more than the number of times permitted by the license printed on the box.
If Sony doesn’t like what they think I’m doing, they’re free to take me to court over it. None of this extrajudicial nonsense.
- Such a table can't exist. Pronunciation is varies, so your choice of articles adds character to your text in much the same way your accent does for spoken words.
Take "herb," for example. In some dialects, the "h" is vocalized, while in others, it's silent. Both "an herb" and "a herb" are valid. Your choice in your writing conveys identity. An author who opts for "a herb" helps paint a vague picture of the individual behind the words, perhaps someone from England.
You could make your own personal table, but it would be for you and only you.
Also, although there is a concrete rule, it's not something we're thinking about as we talk--using the wrong article just feels wrong. Most of us aren't consciously "running an algorithm," as you put it; the correct article just comes out.
Most people will find that they develop the same skill with writing over time. The subset of people who have trouble developing that skill and learn best by memorizing a table of words is going to be quite small. I would never write "a LLM" in the same way that I would never say "an history" out loud.
- The sentence claims that this card is the world’s “largest removable memory card”—that’s false.
It then goes on to say it’s larger than any CFexpress card. Also false.
- This article makes several claims that are trivial to disprove:
> The 4TB capacity doubles that of the largest microSD cards, earning it the title for the world's largest removable memory card.
> CFexpress, known for its superior speed. Announced last year, the latest generation, CFexpress 4.0, supports up to four PCIe 4.0 lanes and 2GB/s per lane. Neither of those card formats can come close to offering 4TB of storage, however.
CFexpress cards are physically larger than SD cards and have no trouble squeezing in 4 TB. They're uncommon, but they do already exist: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1711327-REG/red_digit...
CFexpress is mostly just overpriced PCIe. You can make your own 4 TB CFexpress card with a small adapter and a 4 TB M.2 SSD that supports PCIe. It stands to reason that if there are 4 TB M.2 PCIe SSDs that are about the size of a CFexpress card, then there are also 4 TB CFexpress cards.
Does anyone have a better source?
- I think that when someone is experiencing extreme anxiety over an extended period of time, their actions aren’t necessarily going to be logical. Most people will recover once the stressor is removed. Some people will give up and choose option A. Still others will choose option B.
- In the real world, the security team just handles it directly. https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/six-former-ebay-employees...
Edit: In all seriousness, I don’t think the situation presented in the aforementioned movie quote is implausible, though I’m inclined to doubt foul play here unless there’s specific evidence to that effect. Depositions can be extraordinarily stressful; compound that with the anxiety of being a whistleblower, and I can see how someone could snap. At the same time, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that there was foul play.
- All you’re doing is antagonizing and soliciting a retaliatory response from anyone with a differing opinion. That doesn’t lead to intriguing, constructive debate and really doesn’t belong on HN.
- Neither. It’s a play on “Unix.”
- I actually knew someone who had a valve like that installed because her CSF pressure kept changing. Periods of high pressure were the most dangerous and led to rapidly deteriorating mental function—and eventually death.
The valve never really worked well, and she didn’t live long enough to determine why.
- Regardless of what may have happened historically (and your claims are dubious, as others have pointed out), it really doesn’t make sense to suggest that the average person is capable of the degree of consent necessary for a long term relationship in their teens.
It’s one thing to acknowledge that we begin to develop a sense of sexuality and gender identity in our teenage or even preteen years, and to foster acceptance of that identity. It’s another matter entirely to suggest that this identity coincides with maturity and ability to consent. At that age, we’re still developing our sense of self and don’t fully understand the various components of intimacy, including consent.
It’s the difference between sex-positivity and sexualization. For whatever reason, our society seems to have a hard time understanding the difference beyond a few well-established scenarios. We understand that it’s healthy for parents to discuss sex and gender with their children: “use a condom,” “understand and respect that others may have different preferences than you, and that’s okay—likewise, you don’t need to follow the crowd,” “consent while intoxicated isn’t consent.” We also understand that it’s not healthy for parents to be actively encouraging their teens to get married.
But we seem to have trouble extrapolating that line into technology: is it okay for parents to be running these accounts? Are the children they represent capable of consenting to these images being published? Do we care that some of the consumers of these images are treating them as sexual? If there’s a likelihood that the images will be sexualized by some subset of the audience, is that a good reason to avoid posting them, and, if so, where is that line?