DinaCoder99

Damn, he really stuck his whole ass out in the wind with this branding then.

Man this is such an aside but "meta" is such a terrible name for a company, much like "X". Meta what? Why would you choose a greek prefix and not stick anything at the end of it? Terrible branding.

Tesla's gonna take over the car market, like, any day man, I swear.

Vetting them for what? How much abuse they can take?

> The obvious fix is to stop animating when the step gets below some threshold, but that's inelegant.

Why? It's simple, easy to implement and validate, and provides the desired visual impact. Seems perfectly elegant to me.

Given that the canopy itself modulates the moisture in the air, this explanation seems to provide a bound on the outlier of height relative to other trees more so than an absolute barrier.

The thousand character classic was also used to teach the reading of chinese characters in Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese, though perhaps to a lesser extent than the three character classic. I have no idea to what extent this is true today, but it certainly held up until the 19th century.

Musk has lost a massive amount of credibility because of failing to deliver on most of the self-proclaimed potential of his businesses—basically, all of them outside of the potential of SpaceX, and even there he should be grateful the perceived value of the company isn't tied to going to mars.

Eddie Chapman even more so!

Sure, but they can also easily ask anyone. I don't know why it makes sense to shrug off that responsibility onto some nationalist bullshit.

Easy! Maximization of index funds.

> I don’t understand what you are saying here. How many months does one need to stay to hover up the trade secrets / IP?

Presumably the more valuable the IP, the harder it is to access.

Ah. Grim. Thank you for the context.

Maybe i'm not looking in the right place, but this does not strike me as an endorsement of Hitler.

Cats are unable or unwilling to tackle larger rats, including the ones outside my apartment. They're much better mousers than ratters.

I've found you can also just disable javascript, paste, and reenable javascript again.

Sometimes it seems like violence is the only solution modern american politicians can conceive of, even if it's an insane waste of both money and human effort and doesn't work.

How can this do anything but embarrass the city?

Well if you're asking for a product recommendation you're literally asking to be advertised to, so.... I guess you get what you want?

Wouldn't mentioning products at all be a dead giveaway?

I don't see how that would affect a screenshot—the difference is clearly visible in screenshots. Furthermore the differences between Mac, Linux, and Window font rendering are widely discussed on the internet. I think I just prefer the way that Apple chose to render fonts.

This blog post seems to lay out the tradeoff between, at least, Windows and Mac font rendering: https://blog.typekit.com/2010/10/15/type-rendering-operating...

That is only true for high modern European (western) history.

> There isn't much point eating together if that sort of politics might come into play, the power differential is too large.

Historically, the value of eating with your men is that the men will actually follow your orders rather than just mutinying and killing you.

This is often cited as a reason why Amazon is such a hostile work environment, for instance. It's not clear if this actually produces the desired results, though.

Well whatever it does, I actually prefer it to hinting and always have. Whatever happens on linux makes the fonts look too thin for my personal taste.

Regardless, I hope everyone agrees that hi dpi + no hinting (or smearing) looks the best.

> Attach a MacMini to a non-HiDPI display and you could recognize that the font rendering is awkward.

Ironically for "always expose relevant options through system settings" Apple, you can still access font smoothing via command line, e.g. "defaults -currentHost write -g AppleFontSmoothing -int 3". You can use 0-3 where 0 disables it (default) and 3 uses "strong" hinting, with 1 and 2 in between.

There seems to be a conflation in two subtly different types of debugging here—one is simply regurgitating state while tracking down a specific bug on a local machine and should not be committed and the other is intended to be checked into possibly production code with the assumption being sent to a log aggregator. I think both are valid techniques, but one clearly benefits from the use of the `log` crate more than the other.

Even checking the class of a given object feels quite flimsy to me, although this perhaps isn't a huge problem in a coherent codebase.

This isn't meant to be an attack on javascript as a worthwhile tool to learn, by the way, just a testament to the fact that it's not an easy language to master in the slightest.

I think that "strong belief grounded in degrees of trust" is a much more powerful concept than "fact" in practice, not to mention one that's much more difficult to attack from a theory of knowledge perspective especially in a post-Wittgenstein world, but I understand why this is such a controversial concept when there's such a focus on folks actively undermining this.

We actually do have material evidence connecting pre-age of discovery Siberia with Alaska via Aleutian trade and shared genetics, though, and the strength of the product of evidence is always stronger than a single hypothesis of connection in isolation. To my knowledge no such archeological or genetic link has been established between pre-Vinland saga Greenland and Iceland, let alone Norway.

(Hell, I'm not sure there's any genetic evidence of admixture between the expeditions of Erik the Red and Greenlanders despite clear cultural and material evidence of contact, though that's probably more of a testament to lack of continual trade than evidence it didn't occur at all.)

There's essentially no chance of that—any linguistic connection would have happened in the last 2,000 years or so. Spoken language sans written record changes much too fast to preserve such semantics—and, to be clear, I don't think there's any evidence of a morphological feature being preserved that long without becoming mutually unintelligible literally anywhere. Even considering the last 2,000 years you'd have to explain how the language feature hopped over the Sámi (who speak a language much closer to Finnish than Norwegian or Greenlandic) to be established between two cultures with no archaeological or cultural evidence of contact.

Secondly, the semantics of the two suffixes appear to be different, with the Inuit term being a fairly abstract place term, and the Germanic prefix being specifically a geographic location suffix.