Yes! This is exactly the point - machinistic enforcement makes no sense in case of speed limits. All laws about driving explicitly say that at the end of the day it's the driver's responsibility to drive safely and if they cause an accident, then they are at fault in some cases even if they followed the speed limit.
The point is that whether you drove dangerously is not a strict, machinistic "if-then" assessment. Automatic enforcement of speeding is ridiculous when viewed in this context.
And the people saying "yes but there is more energy in a faster vehicle" have clearly not felt the difference between driving a car with drum brakes vs modern brakes.
The speed limit example is a great one. Consider a road that has a 35mph limit. Now - which of the following scenarios is SAFER:
a) I'm driving on the road in a brand new 4x4 porsche on a sunny day with great visibility and brand new tyres. Doing 40mph.
b) I'm driving on the same road in a 70s car with legal but somewhat worn out tyres, in the dark, while it's raining heavily. Doing 35mph.
Of course technically option a is violating the law but no sane police officer will give you a fine in this case. Nor should they! A robot will, however. This is stupid.
Would you have remembered to write this comment if the fields had never been added back?
In the case you describe, there are three possible outcomes, in broad categories:
1) The fields do turn out to be useful, in exactly the way you implemented them first.
2) The feature is implemented, but using a different set of fields or implementation.
3) The feature is not implemented.
Even if we assign equal probablility to all the options, creating them in the beginning still only results in a win in 1/3 of the time.
How much extra mental effort would have been spent making sure that all the other features implemented in the mean time work correctly with the metadata columns if they had not been removed?
Of course, you turned out to be correct in this case and that shows you certainly had excellent insight and understanding of the project, but understanding whether a decision was right or wrong, should be done based on information available at the time, not with full hindsight.
It's just interesting to me that lower in the thread with less votes there are actually insightful comments that have real content and the most upvoted comment is the one that says "this sucks because I can't afford it".
This seems to me to be an issue in a number of other places as well - the website previously known as twitter is probably a good example where someone posts something and a lot of the replies are just random hate and nitpicking about a single, irrelevant word in the comment.
I guess I just don't get why people bother to do that. And it is kind of interesting to think about - is there some way to encourage more thoughtful responses?
Good article content, but wow the article looks great! Really incredible!
If by any chance someone knows the tools that were used to make the big-font subtitles (or the whole page?), enlightenment would be highly appreciated!
Thank you for this explanation. This is really interesting. I'm not deaf, so this is very difficult for me to understand, but that doesn't mean it's not important.
I'm trying to find something to compare to, but not sure if I'm getting this right.
I can't sense radio waves in the 87-110Mhz range, but let's imagine that most people can. This means that they can hear all the FM radios all the time.
Certainly, this would be very annoying, especially if you are not able to block it out. In this sense, I would be better off - one less annoying thing to deal with.
Of course, everyone else would be able to be up to date with all the news instantly, as they would always hear them from the radio. And, assuming you also had the ability to "tune the station" that you can hear, you would be able to listen to music or interesting shows all the time.
This would be good and fun.
Would I miss the ability that everyone else has? This is a very interesting question and I don't know the answer.
But, I would think that if someone gave me a wearable FM radio that I could turn on/off at will, I would think that I certainly would accept that.
Again, I'm sorry if this is not a good analogy and as all analogies this doesn't really capture all the nuances of course, but would this be similar at least in theory?
I'm certainly not part of the elite even in the current deathful world :)
And yes, of course there will be issues, difficult ones. But life is, was and will always be filled with difficulty, obstacles, struggles and failures. Mine certainly is.
However, I believe in progress and overcoming obstacles and I believe that if we ever manage to extend life, we will figure out ways to make it work.
There is a lot of talk how finding jobs is more difficult these days if you are young and do not have experience. That real-estate is so expensive that nobody is able to afford it.
And I'm sure it's true.
But I also see a lot of young people succeeding and thriving in ways that I could not even have thought of. Therefore, I think there is reason to believe that the next generation will be able to find a way to make it work. As has every generation before.
When I was younger I used to think that situations in the world are now radically different from what the previous generation had to deal with. And on the first level of abstraction, they are! Computers did not exist for the generation before me. So of course it was new.
However, that is just the first level of abstraction. Take the second level of abstraction and you can look back and identify things that are completely new for each new generation. I mean, how different was the concept of going to work in a factory with a loom from the previous generation where machines did not exist at all!
Yes, it is a bit selfish. But it is also okay to be a bit selfish from time to time. After all, it is your life. Of course, this needs to be carefully balanced. But doing things every now and then just because you want to, is okay.
However the "not how it works" comment ... well, you could make that pretty much throughout the time that humans have lived. We have been continuously changing the environment around us to suit our needs and wants. Early farmers burned down forests to get fertilized land. We domesticated crops and animals and bred them to grow the way we wanted them. We built things to make life safer, better and easier.
You could say "that's not how it works" about a tractor or wheat with multiple stems from a single seed.
But of course, there will be problems that need to be overcome if we ever do figure out ways of extending life. But again, there always have been problems with new inventions.
I firmly believe that humanity has the ability to overcome problems, develop, learn and improve. And that aligns well with wanting more life!
Of course I want to live as long as possible! Because life is awesome! I want more of it!
The fear of death is of course real, but that's not the main reason for wanting to live longer. I want more experience, I want to see what happens in the future! I want to understand more, learn more and be able to do it at a more relaxed pace without the feeling that time will run out!
The starving, and heavily repressed citizens do not have access to the internet in NK. This attack did not affect any of them to any extent.
Whom it did affect a bit, hopefully, were the people complicit in the repressive dictatorship that runs the country.
The repressive dictatorship that engages in, among many other bad things, scams and online fraud to partially finance the country. For this they of course use the internet. So, taking them off-line for a week may have prevented someone from getting scammed. Good result.
> But you can’t just walk away from a gasoline car when it’s filling. And gas stations aren’t very attractive destination to do much of anything.
That's probably a US (or maybe some other places) thing but you certainly can do that here in Estonia. I do it all the time - start the pumping and then go inside to the gas station to buy a drink or whatever. Especially with the in-app payment for gas it's great.
Never heard of anyone having an accident with it either...
True, there was extensive effort, but wasn't the effort geared towards providing the deceased god a path back to the heavens or wherever they had come from?
So, presumably after they had ascended with the help of the burial provisions, the remainder of the body was irrelevant?
But perhaps this part was not clearly defined in the teachings.
The point is that whether you drove dangerously is not a strict, machinistic "if-then" assessment. Automatic enforcement of speeding is ridiculous when viewed in this context.
And the people saying "yes but there is more energy in a faster vehicle" have clearly not felt the difference between driving a car with drum brakes vs modern brakes.