cooper12
cooper12 on Hacker News
On the mobile site, go to the settings in the sidebar and enable Advanced Mode.
And no, they won't ever get rid of categories. It's just that the phone variants of the site are very heavily geared towards a specific type of reader, at the expense of editors or other types of users. They have been trying to address this over incremental updates though, such as now showing talk pages.
> they gave each language a different Cyrillic orthography than the rest to fragment them even further
That doesn't seem correct to me. Different languages require different orthographies because they have different phonetics. Compare the Latin script when used for English to German to Vietnamese to Turkish. Same thing with the Arabic script with Persian and Urdu. When tailored orthographies aren't used, the written representation becomes a poor representation of speech. Though even then it might not have been a perfect fit in the first place, requiring digraphs or diacritics. Or the spoken language can diverge.
They're also using a monospaced font for the body text and aren't limiting the line length.
ffmpeg -i foo.mp4 -c:v h264_videotoolbox -b:v 1600k foo_out.mp4
On macOS, this uses hardware acceleration to reencode a video at a lower bitrate. My macbook is from 2012, so this does make a notable difference. There's also "hevc_videotoolbox" for H.265 if your machine supports it.
I read it as "[you] double-time[d] me, oxface", with "ox face" being meant as an insult.
SKIP is about matching the kanji to a pattern and counting the strokes of the two portions. This is more about inputting the kanji's constituent parts themselves.
For example, say we have the kanji 訓. For a SKIP-based lookup, you'd see this as 言|川, and you probably know that's 7 and 3 strokes. Whereas with this approach, you could type in the parts, e.g. いう (backspace) to get 言 and かわ to get 川. A lot faster when kanji have many parts or you're not so sure about the stroke counts. Yes, SKIP would be more helpful if you don't know the parts.
> In formal settings, the problem will be taken care of
Forensic evidence has been and still is systematically abused:
> * a 2002 FBI re-examination of microscopic hair comparisons the agency’s scientists had performed in criminal cases, in which DNA testing revealed that 11 percent of hair samples found to match microscopically actually came from different individuals;
> * a 2004 National Research Council report, commissioned by the FBI, on bullet-lead evidence, which found that there was insufficient research and data to support drawing a definitive connection between two bullets based on compositional similarity of the lead they contain;
> * a 2005 report of an international committee established by the FBI to review the use of latent fingerprint evidence in the case of a terrorist bombing in Spain, in which the committee found that “confirmation bias”—the inclination to confirm a suspicion based on other grounds—contributed to a misidentification and improper detention; and
> * studies reported in 2009 and 2010 on bitemark evidence, which found that current procedures for comparing bitemarks are unable to reliably exclude or include a suspect as a potential biter.
> Beyond these kinds of shortfalls with respect to “reliable methods” in forensic feature-comparison disciplines, reviews have found that expert witnesses have often overstated the probative value of their evidence, going far beyond what the relevant science can justify.
(https://web.archive.org/web/20170120002449/https://www.white... page 16)
Even more:
* Tire and shoe prints: https://www.apmreports.org/story/2016/09/27/questionable-sci...
* Lie detector tests: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygraph#Effectiveness
* Burn patterns: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/forensic-tools-wh...
If anyone wants to be ahead of the next trend of listening to nostalgic Japanese music, check out enka. [0] Even when it was contemporary, it was harkening to a bygone past. Kidding a little though, ballads probably don't appeal to modern listeners.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enka
Setting your user agent would only be considered hacking by the same people who think the Internet is a series of pipes. The browsers themselves copy each other's user agents for interoperability, so it's far past the point that changing it to look like another agent would be considered devious.
OED (an older edition):
> the process of renovating and improving a house or district so that it conforms to middle-class taste
In this case, it's making the internet conform to Google's taste. Seems to be an appropriate use of the term, even if in the more recent sense we think of it as displacement of people or local businesses.
SSR = Server-side Rendering, if anyone else was unfamiliar like me.
Your quote doesn't even make sense here since they're not suppressing his COVID ideas. Regardless, the scientific community considered it and responded:
https://www.johnsnowmemo.com/
There was a NYT article on this today. Most other scientists thought that their idea didn't actually consider how this would be implemented, and ignored those living in multigenerational households. Touting fringe theories to pander to libertarian ideals and those in the White House in the midst of a pandemic is not responsible science. It's fine to float these ideas, but if mainstream science didn't agree, it becomes dangerous, since their whole approach was "live like nothing's happening and let grandma fend for herself". Note, we already have a case study in this approach in the form of Sweden, and they have high deaths figures and economic impact.
Wikipedia only accepts freely-licensed content (for example, CC-BY or CC-BY-SA; it must allow commercial use). People who are creating professional-quality video are not giving it away for free. Video takes a non-trivial amount of effort to script, record, create imagery for, and edit. That's on top of obtaining equipment like a camera, mic, computer for editing, etc. Sure everyone has a smartphone these days, but I think you were implying more than shaky badly-framed vertical video. If you'd like to see more videos on Wikipedia, the best place to start is by contributing yourself. I've done the same for photographs of local things in my area.
There actually are two methods of interactivity on Wikipedia right now, the Graph extension [0] and Kartographer. [1] With the first you can create charts, timelines, and histograms, based on Vega. With the second, you can add points on maps (with images), have shapes, and outlines, from OpenStreetMap. Unfortunately, both aren't used as much as they should because most are comfortable using other tools and baking things into PNGs, and these weren't advertised that heavily.
[0]: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Graph/Demo
[1]: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Extension:Kartographer
The browsers could buffer the text in text fields until the field loses focus (clicked another field or submit) or hit enter. It would break search-as-you-type functionality, but not the biggest loss in the world.
CJK fonts also commonly max this out as well.
WPS is considered insecure.
Not sure why you chose to have the mouse pointer change on hover for all the cards via CSS, as nothing happens when you click on them.
Firstly, Wikipedia doesn't have moderators, but admins. Their function is not to moderate article content, but rather carry out technical duties like page protection. They don't personally decide if an article should be fixed or deleted. They close deletion discussions in which the editing community reaches a consensus on whether an article meets Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. This is not based on quality or usefulness, but rather notability. [0] If you're dismayed at deletionism, I suggest participating in these discussions and making arguments based in Wikipedia's policies and demonstrating notability with sources. I do, and I've saved many articles in the area I edit.
In this specific case, the article was proposed for deletion (a step behind a deletion discussion) and no one opposed it. The reason wasn't just based on quality issues, but also notability and original research. If you're interested in improving the page, you can request undeletion. [1]
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Proposed_deletion#Ob...
I don't for a second doubt that a single person in this age could spin up a site. In fact, looking at the source, it shows that it's Wordpress. However, even the best webdev has their blind spots, but this site somehow covers them all: seeing the need for a slogan, no grammar/style issues in the writing, all claims are sourced, even the disclaimer, etc. Also, the whole storefront thing is very sus, as it seems the point is to spread the slogans. In fact, there's even a new feature at the bottom of the page to "send this to a friend".
That site claims to be "self-funded" and by "an American citizen" (singular), yet it's very obvious this was made by a decently funded team. It's very well-designed, comes with a slogan, each point has a summary header, details, and a citation, juxtaposition with professional photographs of Harris laughing, and then a disclaimer at the bottom clearly vetted by lawyers. Oh, and there's even a link to a sister site for Biden, complete with a storefront with more catchy slogans on t-shirts. Highly suspicious to say the least. I wonder who's behind it.
More like: rendering Doom output as pixels in the task manager for hundreds of CPU cores. They didn't massively parallelize Doom itself, but just the pixel drawing.
Also supports subnet notation, so you could add /24 to the end of the URL for example.
If you click the "Computed" tab next to the CSS rules, and scroll down, at the bottom there's "Rendered fonts", which confirms that it's LAText.