karyon
Having a budget for donations is really nice because it makes giving away money much easier. In my mental model this is simply not my money, but I can decide where it goes. This also makes spontaneous donations much easier. When the Ukraine war broke out and my employer set up a donation matching program, giving away 2000€ didn't require second thoughts from me.
Scaling your donations with your salary is nice because it gives you a reason to ask for higher salary besides becoming even richer.
With a software engineering salary, this is also enough money to support multiple organizations with a significant amount of money each. Discovering new organizations that do cool stuff and reading the occasional newsletter with positive news, knowing that your money supported that outcome, is really nice.
I give the bulk of it to the Against Malaria Foundation, drawing from the effective altruism idea. They distribute mosquito nets and score very high in the (years of "healthy" life saved)/dollar metric. The rest goes to various NGOs around human rights, civil liberties, environmental protection, journalism, and the FOSS/donationware that I use.
There's not much more to it than you can see, there's the BIM360 tab on the left that allows browsing through a cloud directory structure, and Civil3D also has a learning content tab.
Qt-based Software uses Qt WebEngine instead of the .NET stuff. The reason we're using HTML + JS is that we wanted to share the start page between different applications and HTML + JS is the lowest common denominator so to say, something that every team could integrate.
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/indi...
a little teaser:
> Screaming 'racism' at people because blacks are collectively less intelligent...is insane
> The whole breeding arena of the species needs to be cleaned the fuck up
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux is also great.
I own that one (extended version) and in the "sitting" position (I assume that's how you would use the wheel) I can make it wobble front to back by a few millimeters if i really lean onto it, but side-to-side i can move it barely a millimeter or two even when yanking it rather hard. It feels really solid in that direction. In the standing position, it does move more.
I have one for work and one for non-work and it's great!
(OT: 'Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." ', from the HN guidelines)
Yet parent calls it ignorant, of what? a sibling comment is "horrified" that the article gained so much attention here, although it seems to me that with it's focus on building stuff it's 100% on topic (which is "Anything that good hackers would find interesting").
As it's a little unsettling to me that other people find it horrifying that people like me found the article interesting, any details would be appreciated.
We haven't thought about higher-order storage layers. I guess we should do that... Thanks!
We also thought about hashing user IDs, but with any practical number of users in the database it would be possible for an attacker to just hash all existing user IDs and checking them all. So that would be more an obfuscation, making de-anonymization harder, but not impossible.
edit: we considered putting the user's password into that hash as well. that would also enable us to let the user edit their vote later, while still retaining anonymity. But then we'd need to ask them for their PW when voting, or we put a hash of the PW into their session data, and we'd need to restrict changing the PW until the election is over, and it seemed not worthwhile.
Rewriting the election in the same transaction sounds smarter than the periodic solution. I need to discuss that with the team, thanks!
Suppose you have an app that lets people anonymously vote or comment on stuff, but only once. The vote in the DB must not have any connection to the person. So, you give the person a flag whether or not they voted already, and store the vote separately.
Now, you'd want to set both values in the same transaction for obvious reasons. But, since Postgres uses MVCC, the two tuples that are added to the database both contain the same transaction ID (XID), so there's the connection between user and vote again.
There seems to be no way to instruct postgres to "clean" those XIDs in any way. What we're doing now is periodically and manually updating every tuple in each affected table with dummy changes, essentially duplicating all tuples with all new XIDs, and then running VACUUM to delete the tuples with the old, potentially-deanonymizing XIDs. We haven't found anything easier...
i wouldn't be surprised if the same held true for cleaning agents.
that is the point of net neutrality: handling packets on a non-discriminatory best-effort basis. if the "channel is stuffed", then a certain percentage of all the packets in the channel, including the netflix ones, will be dropped.
Evolving Rust through Epochs
There are transpilers (cross-compilers?) that translate from HLSL to GLSL and back and into every other shading language out there, there's really a lot of such tools.
> Secondly as I understand it the Vulkan API is much more low level and barebones than DirectX
Vulkan is about as low-level as Direct3D 12, which has not much in common with Direct3D 11 and lower, just like Vulkan has not much in common with OpenGL. OpenGL is (very roughly) equivalent to Direct3D 11, and Vulkan is more like Direct3d 12. The thing is that switching between the similar APIs is a lot of work, but does not require large refactorings, whereas switching from OpenGL/Direct3D11 to Vulkan/D3d12 requires more fundamental work.
but the xposed route should be simple, provided you have root access.
it provides a location service that works without google and they re-built the play services and maps API, so you don't have to have any google apps installed at all. for those apps that actually need to talk to google servers, there's an option for that.
It might be the goal of people lacking empathy and people who think happiness comes with money, which is true only up to an amount far below 1M. Unless, again, the money is meant to be given to others. I am not sure what you mean by considering my argument a non-sequitur, could you elaborate?
> the sheer mechanics of our economy would guarantee it to be a net positive
By "Making a positive impact on others" I didn't mean making a positive impact on the economy. I meant helping actual problems like hunger, diseases and pollution.