danieltien

Every time I think my opinion of him can't sink lower, he does yet another thing to show his true colors. I'm sickened that I ever was a fan of his, and nauseated that our country's space program depends on his whims.

Summary
Twitter suspended the accounts of several journalists who have been covering billionaire Elon Musk, who acquired the social network in October, and that of upstart rival service Mastodon.
Late Thursday, accounts for reporters from publications including the Washington Post, the New York Times, Mashable, CNN and Substack were listed as blocked and their tweets were no longer visible, with the company’s standard notice saying it “suspends accounts that violate the Twitter rules.”
Twitter also suspended the feed of social-media site Mastodon, which earlier had posted a link on its Twitter page to an account on its own site that uses publicly available flight data to track Musk’s private jet. On Wednesday, Twitter had suspended multiple accounts that followed private jet locations, including Musk’s.
 
Quotes
 
My thoughts
So much for "free speech absolutism". Elon is happy to post info that doxes former employees and put them in danger and then say "oops", but people who report on people who post publicly available data on flights? (Wacko who approached his kid's car was in a car not near an airport), that's a no go.
 
Sources
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/15/technology/twitter-suspends-journalist-accounts-elon-musk.html
https://www.theverge.com/2022/12/15/23512004/elon-musk-starts-banning-critical-journalists-from-twitter
https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2022/12/15/twitter-journalists-suspended-musk/
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-12-16/twitter-suspends-accounts-of-mastodon-journalists-covering-musk?srnd=premium

Every time I think my opinion of him can't sink lower, he does yet another thing to show his true colors. I'm sickened that I ever was a fan of his, and nauseated that our country's space program depends on his whims.

Every time I think my opinion of him can't sink lower, he does yet another thing to show his true colors. I'm sickened that I ever was a fan of his, and nauseated that our country's space program depends on his whims.

The problem with this approach is fallacy that being vaccinated means you cannot be a carrier. Which simply isn't true. Being immune to a virus can still mean you can carry it for a short while after being exposed to it. Now, if they will only allow to board for example airplanes to everyone who have been vaccinated at least 1-2 weeks ago (it takes some time for vaccine to become effective), then sure. But if you mix and match people, it can still spread even via vaccinated people. It does slow it down a bit tho.
 
@pinksnowbirdie
mRNA is a quite predictable thing. Imagine it as executable computer code. When you feed certain information through mRNA, it'll predictably decode into a specific outcome or function. In this case, mRNA will tell our body to generate a certain harmless piece of code that resembles SARS-COV 2. As it's generated, our immune system responds to it.
 
I wonder if we'll have any say on which vaccine you want to get when it'll be our turn in my country. Given the weak efficacy of Astrazenica vaccine, I sure don't want to get theirs. In all honesty, I'd actually prefer the Pfizer's mRNA based one above all. It has really shown one of highest efficacy and very little side effects. People currently getting them only have Pfizer as it's the only approved in my country so far. But when it'll be our turn we're probably getting others too and that kinda sucks. I don't want to just get some random one...

The VR game Valve should have released instead.... Featuring @AlexTheGreatish.

The VR game Valve should have released instead.... Featuring @AlexTheGreatish.

The VR game Valve should have released instead.... Featuring @AlexTheGreatish.

The VR game Valve should have released instead.... Featuring @AlexTheGreatish.

The VR game Valve should have released instead.... Featuring @AlexTheGreatish.

The VR game Valve should have released instead.... Featuring @AlexTheGreatish.

The VR game Valve should have released instead.... Featuring @AlexTheGreatish.

The VR game Valve should have released instead.... Featuring @AlexTheGreatish.

The VR game Valve should have released instead.... Featuring @AlexTheGreatish.

The VR game Valve should have released instead.... Featuring @AlexTheGreatish.

The VR game Valve should have released instead.... Featuring @AlexTheGreatish.

The VR game Valve should have released instead.... Featuring @AlexTheGreatish.

From Wired UK:
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/transparent-influencers-youtube-instagram
 
 
The article focuses on mostly fashion/makeup influencers. Some thoughts:
1. Linus has been doing this disclosure transparency thing for YEARS in WAN show discussions and dedicated videos: LTT Honest Answers Playlist (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8mG-RkN2uTxJiNGHnLrb-i-XP6s3y87K)
2. The UK seems to have the most stringent requirements for disclosures; the FTC has some regulations in the United States, but they're pretty toothless--most recently evidenced by idiot vloggers like Ricegum and Jake Paul pushing gambling loot boxes by posting videos of them "winning" prizes pre-seeded by Mystery Brand.
 

Reading through the responses--most of these are talking about Apple "turning off" the existing user base if they jettison the X86/AMD64 architecture based on the current slate of applications that depend on the current setup. It's really early days, you guys.
 
So a little history:
 
During the Steve Jobs days, the main issue that Apple had with IBM and PowerPC was its inability to efficiently scale after reaching G5. The PowerMac G5 towers had MASSIVE power and heat issues and some models even required water cooling. Some of these models developed leaks in their cooling loops, causing a lot of problems with enterprise customers. 

 
A couple of things really frustrated Jobs about being stuck with the Power architecture and being beholden to an outside source for the chips. First, after announcing that they would launch 3GHz models within a year, they kept delaying until they gave up because IBM couldn't produce an acceptable chip; G5 models topped out at 2.7GHz. The G5 version of the iMac was famous for being like a desktop space heater. This all meant that despite plans and promises, Apple couldn't produce a G5 PowerBook laptop. (Intel had a similar architecture-power consumption issue with their NetBurst architecture; Prescott chips were famous for overheating, causing Intel to finally switch to Core) 
 
The fascinating thing about MacOS that a lot of people don't know (or forgot) was that its Unix core was based on NeXTSTEP, which was an OS that NeXT, the company Jobs started after leaving Apple, created for their computers. The manufacturing computers part didn't work out for them, so before being acquired by Apple, they were an OS company. Jobs' daily driver machine was not an Apple Powerbook, but an IBM Thinkpad running NeXTSTEP. The word was that he hated the computers Apple was producing during his period of absence). NeXSTSTEP and the OpenStep successor API was already ported to the X86 architecture. Not sure who was responsible for the decision, (probably Avie Tevanian, the architect of NeXTSTEP and SVP of software engineering when he came over to Apple with Jobs), but they decided to secretly build an x86 version of OSX for every version of the PowerPC OS they released. A major reason why the PowerPC to Intel transition happened so smoothly was that most of the heavy lifting in the OS redesign was already done, and they already had experience migrating people from the old MacOS Classic to the Unix-based OSX. Most applications developed in XCode just needed to be recompiled with minor modifications to create a Universal binary that had could run on both PPC and x86 computers. Jobs famously announced the transition by announcing that the entire developer keynote he was giving was already working on a version of OSX running on an Intel Pentium 4 box. The dev kits were released, with an Intel processor board mounted in a modified PowerMac G5 case. One of the things people noticed most was the fact that the board/processor was laughably tiny compared with the latest and greatest G5:

 
Fast forward a little over a year later, and Apple announces that they've completed the transition across their product lines. PPC support would be phased out over the next several years. For many years, the Intel-Apple relationship would be very fruitful, even to the point where Jobs approached them about developing a mobile processor for the product that would eventually become the iPhone. 
 
And then the Intel Tick-Tock processor cadence faltered. People commonly relied on upgrading their MacBooks on the expectation that a major processor upgrade would justify the arguably expensive decision to buy a new laptop. 
 
The common thread that they were plagued with back then as they are faced with today, is that they depended on regular processor upgrades for their product refresh cadences.  Every new iOS device touts a new version of the A-series processor that promises a vastly improved "performance per watt" proposition. It's partially what allows Apple to offer similar or better app performance on their phone compared to an "equivalent" processored Android phone with more RAM. When Apple announced that iOS was based on not a watered-down custom mobile OS, but a version of the same MacOS kernel compiled for ARM, it definitely raised some eyebrows in the developer community. 
 
This is all a long way to reiterate that there's nothing to panic about... at least not yet. There are many valid complaints about their practices and priorities with respect to product design and engineering (e.g, keyboard design, loss of MagSafe, thermal design), but they have never released a new product that performed objectively worse than the one before. They release new categories to try out new things (e.g., the MacBook Air was their first product line to use the U-series processors, the 12" MacBook was the first to try out the m3/m5 processors). Their time window is long and allows them to move blocks around to see what the developer community does with it. They've never bet the company on a sudden and rapid pivot. They tend to sit back and allow others to try new technologies or trends (Microsoft UWP) first before coming up with their own refined variation. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If Apple does transition the Mac platform to ARM, they won't try to replace your Core i7 MacBook Pro with an ARM version until they're confident that they have a processor that can match and outclass what they're replacing. 
 
Alright, lecture over. Back to grading papers.

From Wired UK:
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/transparent-influencers-youtube-instagram
 
 
The article focuses on mostly fashion/makeup influencers. Some thoughts:
1. Linus has been doing this disclosure transparency thing for YEARS in WAN show discussions and dedicated videos: LTT Honest Answers Playlist (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8mG-RkN2uTxJiNGHnLrb-i-XP6s3y87K)
2. The UK seems to have the most stringent requirements for disclosures; the FTC has some regulations in the United States, but they're pretty toothless--most recently evidenced by idiot vloggers like Ricegum and Jake Paul pushing gambling loot boxes by posting videos of them "winning" prizes pre-seeded by Mystery Brand.
 

From Wired UK:
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/transparent-influencers-youtube-instagram
 
 
The article focuses on mostly fashion/makeup influencers. Some thoughts:
1. Linus has been doing this disclosure transparency thing for YEARS in WAN show discussions and dedicated videos: LTT Honest Answers Playlist (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8mG-RkN2uTxJiNGHnLrb-i-XP6s3y87K)
2. The UK seems to have the most stringent requirements for disclosures; the FTC has some regulations in the United States, but they're pretty toothless--most recently evidenced by idiot vloggers like Ricegum and Jake Paul pushing gambling loot boxes by posting videos of them "winning" prizes pre-seeded by Mystery Brand.
 

From Wired UK:
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/transparent-influencers-youtube-instagram
 
 
The article focuses on mostly fashion/makeup influencers. Some thoughts:
1. Linus has been doing this disclosure transparency thing for YEARS in WAN show discussions and dedicated videos: LTT Honest Answers Playlist (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8mG-RkN2uTxJiNGHnLrb-i-XP6s3y87K)
2. The UK seems to have the most stringent requirements for disclosures; the FTC has some regulations in the United States, but they're pretty toothless--most recently evidenced by idiot vloggers like Ricegum and Jake Paul pushing gambling loot boxes by posting videos of them "winning" prizes pre-seeded by Mystery Brand.
 

Reading through the responses--most of these are talking about Apple "turning off" the existing user base if they jettison the X86/AMD64 architecture based on the current slate of applications that depend on the current setup. It's really early days, you guys.
 
So a little history:
 
During the Steve Jobs days, the main issue that Apple had with IBM and PowerPC was its inability to efficiently scale after reaching G5. The PowerMac G5 towers had MASSIVE power and heat issues and some models even required water cooling. Some of these models developed leaks in their cooling loops, causing a lot of problems with enterprise customers. 

 
A couple of things really frustrated Jobs about being stuck with the Power architecture and being beholden to an outside source for the chips. First, after announcing that they would launch 3GHz models within a year, they kept delaying until they gave up because IBM couldn't produce an acceptable chip; G5 models topped out at 2.7GHz. The G5 version of the iMac was famous for being like a desktop space heater. This all meant that despite plans and promises, Apple couldn't produce a G5 PowerBook laptop. (Intel had a similar architecture-power consumption issue with their NetBurst architecture; Prescott chips were famous for overheating, causing Intel to finally switch to Core) 
 
The fascinating thing about MacOS that a lot of people don't know (or forgot) was that its Unix core was based on NeXTSTEP, which was an OS that NeXT, the company Jobs started after leaving Apple, created for their computers. The manufacturing computers part didn't work out for them, so before being acquired by Apple, they were an OS company. Jobs' daily driver machine was not an Apple Powerbook, but an IBM Thinkpad running NeXTSTEP. The word was that he hated the computers Apple was producing during his period of absence). NeXSTSTEP and the OpenStep successor API was already ported to the X86 architecture. Not sure who was responsible for the decision, (probably Avie Tevanian, the architect of NeXTSTEP and SVP of software engineering when he came over to Apple with Jobs), but they decided to secretly build an x86 version of OSX for every version of the PowerPC OS they released. A major reason why the PowerPC to Intel transition happened so smoothly was that most of the heavy lifting in the OS redesign was already done, and they already had experience migrating people from the old MacOS Classic to the Unix-based OSX. Most applications developed in XCode just needed to be recompiled with minor modifications to create a Universal binary that had could run on both PPC and x86 computers. Jobs famously announced the transition by announcing that the entire developer keynote he was giving was already working on a version of OSX running on an Intel Pentium 4 box. The dev kits were released, with an Intel processor board mounted in a modified PowerMac G5 case. One of the things people noticed most was the fact that the board/processor was laughably tiny compared with the latest and greatest G5:

 
Fast forward a little over a year later, and Apple announces that they've completed the transition across their product lines. PPC support would be phased out over the next several years. For many years, the Intel-Apple relationship would be very fruitful, even to the point where Jobs approached them about developing a mobile processor for the product that would eventually become the iPhone. 
 
And then the Intel Tick-Tock processor cadence faltered. People commonly relied on upgrading their MacBooks on the expectation that a major processor upgrade would justify the arguably expensive decision to buy a new laptop. 
 
The common thread that they were plagued with back then as they are faced with today, is that they depended on regular processor upgrades for their product refresh cadences.  Every new iOS device touts a new version of the A-series processor that promises a vastly improved "performance per watt" proposition. It's partially what allows Apple to offer similar or better app performance on their phone compared to an "equivalent" processored Android phone with more RAM. When Apple announced that iOS was based on not a watered-down custom mobile OS, but a version of the same MacOS kernel compiled for ARM, it definitely raised some eyebrows in the developer community. 
 
This is all a long way to reiterate that there's nothing to panic about... at least not yet. There are many valid complaints about their practices and priorities with respect to product design and engineering (e.g, keyboard design, loss of MagSafe, thermal design), but they have never released a new product that performed objectively worse than the one before. They release new categories to try out new things (e.g., the MacBook Air was their first product line to use the U-series processors, the 12" MacBook was the first to try out the m3/m5 processors). Their time window is long and allows them to move blocks around to see what the developer community does with it. They've never bet the company on a sudden and rapid pivot. They tend to sit back and allow others to try new technologies or trends (Microsoft UWP) first before coming up with their own refined variation. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. If Apple does transition the Mac platform to ARM, they won't try to replace your Core i7 MacBook Pro with an ARM version until they're confident that they have a processor that can match and outclass what they're replacing. 
 
Alright, lecture over. Back to grading papers.

I've always had a problem with people hating apple for the price,  Not recommending it for the price is one thing, but actually hating a company because they can charge more has never really made any sense to me.   If I could charge more for my services and not actually do anything better than the competition I would have it made.
 
 

This is an excellent explanation of how these things work. 
 
I'd like to add that as long as the creator who gets the automated claim disputes it in a timely manner, there is no lost revenue during the period while it was "claimed". 
 
I've been down at IBM Think for the last couple of days and this thread is the first I'm hearing of this issue.. Aaaand it's already resolved. 
 
So, as far as I can tell, everything is working as it should...ish
 
We have noticed a significant uptick in copyright claims in the last couple of weeks, though, with some of them being in really really old content which suggests youtube has made some kind of change to ContentID and we've been trying to figure out how to address it.
 
We are generally pretty supportive of the creation of derivative works by our community and we want to make sure that they aren't being algorithmically claimed, but this change has caused other issues for us too. I woke up the other morning to a handful of claims made against Tech Quickie by LTT... Can't have that. 
 
I'm sure this will be resolved, but it's probably going to take some time for youtube to get their crap in order, as usual.