I spent a very long time giving SolveSpace a native Haiku UI. I'm going to keep doing this kind of thing because there's nothing I personally dislike more than apps that don't use the platform's native UI.
I don't care that my approach is harder for the developer, because the thing I care about is consistency and convenience for the user.
I know the thing you built is neat (I've spent quite a few years working on almost the same thing), but I guess this is why I gave up on pushing my own solution
” nothing I personally dislike more than apps that don't use the platform's native UI”
I’m not sure if this is universally applicable dogma. Games generally apply their own UI regardless of platform.
Web apps generally do as well.
I do realize there is space for apps with least surprise per platform, but it’s not obvious to me if an app benefits from platform standard UI any quantifiable way.
App usability and performance typically benefit greatly from using the native platform they’re running on. Plus all the egress savings of not shipping chromium with every download
"App usability and performance typically benefit greatly from using the native platform they’re running on"
I know this has always been the design dogma but is there any research to back this up? It's a _plausible_ dogma of course!
To be honest I don't see the distinction between apps and games. I am usually irritated if the software I'm using has different UI on different platforms. I realize it's possible most users don't use three or four operating systems daily.
"Plus all the egress savings of not shipping chromium with every download"
I'm not sure what this refers to. Creating a custom UI does not require embedding a browser runtime - it's the most silly thing to do IMO.
There are many professional applications (not games) that use custom-drawn UIs.
Examples include video editing software, 3D modeling tools, and professional audio plug-ins. These applications may rely on a significant amount of platform-specific APIs for better OS integration, yet they maintain a consistent appearance across all supported platforms.
There's still a lot of current-day Windows software without native ARM builds, not to mention hardware drivers which can't even be used under emulation, and the current crop of Snapdragon ARM laptops don't have robust Linux support yet AFAIK. It's going to be an uphill battle compared to Apples ARM transition where they could force everyone to switch on pretty short notice or else get left behind.
One of the benefits of switching to any non-x86 platform would be forcing code to be cleaner and not have hidden assumptions about the platform and would thus be able to henceforth be easily compiled for any architecture. I'm sure there is some janky ARM-only cellphone software, but in the wider world it should a mistake we make again.
Interest rates are high for everyone, they don't depend on your political stance.
Example quote: «In subsequent polls, the firm found that Tesla recouped some of its Democratic buyer base […] that uptick may have come from Musk's relative quiet since in the press since the anti-Semitism debacle.»
I remember reading about this case a few years ago (so I don't have a link). The article said the CSAM was the result of many of the employees in the CIA pranking each other. I am inclined to see this as a selective prosecution that benefits the CIA at the expense of the public interest.
The secrecy they operate under inherently shields them from accountability. We have allowed our constitutional system to be usurped, to have a watcher free from the oversight of an effective watcher (i.e., the public or even its representatives).
Yeah. Taking the CSAM charges at face value is frankly like believing that Epstein killed himself. I have strong doubts about the likelihood of someone knowingly getting themselves into such hot water, with the technical competency to understand their digital fingerprint and what’ll happen if / when the government catches on, let alone his literal insider’s perspective into the US surveillance state, behaving as alleged.
I’m not saying that it’s not possible. I’m not saying that someone behaves logically all the time just because they work with computers, but “oh, and CSAM!” is such an American government t ‘icing on the cake’ ploy that it feels a bit too good to be true.
I still don't understand the belief that Epstein must not have killed himself. I can understand feeling like he might have been killed but I don't know what gives people the conviction that he must have been.
I feel similarly about this case. Is it really that bizarre to think that a person who decides to work for the CIA and then decides to leak information would also have CSAM?
I believe specifically for Epstein's case it was a combination of two things: 1) The "malfunction" of the security cameras outside of his cell, and 2) his seemingly boundless connection to very wealthy and famous people.
Obviously a biased source, but his brother does not thing it was suicide either. That's to say he's right. People do commit suicide in jail or prison, but it does seem weird that a high value prisoner was not properly monitored for suicide-watch. Technically he was, but the Cameras were not working and the guys watching him were very lackadaisical about it.
> and the guys watching him were very lackadaisical about it.
Anyone who knows anything at all about suicide prevention is unsurprised by this. We know that observation does not work because staff cannot maintain it. This is true whether it's 15 minute obs, 5 minute obs, permanent line of sight obs, arms length obs, two to one arms length obs: they do not work.
There are countless examples of staff in hospital, on duty, doing obs, knowing their patient is at increased risk of suicide, falling asleep.
The different between those countless examples and Epstein’e case is that the latter involves perhaps the single most internationally famous and famously at-risk prisoner in human history — so while taking the standard statistics into account is good practice, it’s a bit like using the historical weather patterns to argue against the existence of a currently-happening hurricane.
The word “perhaps” allows for alternate opinions :). But I must say, both Cleopatra and Napoleon existing in a pre social media world suggests their infamy did not spread as far, and neither Napoleon nor Cleopatra had the ability to expose leaders around the world from within their jail cells — thus the “at-risk”.
But I’m curious to hear who you would suggest instead. One of those two? Someone else?
I think that primary causes of assuredness in such conspiratorial matters is 1) political (Epstein didn't kill himself and the people currently in power must be to blame!) and 2) the desire many people have for the world to be more exciting and interesting than it is (this is the ultimate cause of many kinds of magical thinking).
“””
The death of Jeffrey Epstein, a financier arrested on charges of sex trafficking minors, occurred on August 10, 2019, in his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in New York City. Epstein's death was ruled a suicide by hanging by the New York City Medical Examiner's office. However, the circumstances surrounding his death have led to widespread speculation and theories suggesting foul play or negligence. Here are the most pertinent facts, including those that have fueled skepticism about the official suicide ruling:
1. *High-profile Connections*: Epstein had connections to powerful figures internationally, including politicians, celebrities, and royalty. This raised questions about potential motives for wanting him silenced.
2. *Previous Suicide Attempt or Assault*: Epstein had been placed on suicide watch after being found injured in his cell in July 2019, weeks before his death. However, he was taken off suicide watch at the end of July, under circumstances that have been questioned.
3. *Violations of Jail Protocol*: On the night of his death, several standard jail protocols were reportedly violated. For example:
- Epstein's cellmate had been transferred, leaving him alone.
- Guards failed to check on him every 30 minutes, as required.
- Two guards who were supposed to monitor him fell asleep and later falsified records to cover up their negligence.
4. *Malfunctioning Surveillance Cameras*: It was reported that surveillance cameras in the area of Epstein's cell were not functioning properly at the time of his death, leading to a lack of video evidence.
5. *Autopsy Controversies*: The autopsy findings were a focal point of contention. Notably, a forensic pathologist hired by Epstein's brother to observe the autopsy challenged the official suicide ruling, citing injuries that were more consistent with homicidal strangulation than suicide.
6. *Expert Opinions*: Some medical experts have pointed to the broken hyoid bone in Epstein's neck as more typical in cases of strangulation than hanging, though it can occur in both.
7. *Inadequate Staffing and Facility Issues*: Reports highlighted that the MCC was suffering from staffing shortages and other logistical challenges, contributing to a failure in maintaining appropriate surveillance and safety measures.
8. *Legal and Financial Matters*: At the time of his death, Epstein was awaiting trial, and significant attention was on his vast wealth and the potential revelation of more individuals involved in his crimes. His death prevented any possibility of him testifying or cooperating with authorities.
These facts have led to a multitude of theories and calls for further investigation, with critics arguing that the negligence and irregularities point to a possible cover-up or failure to prevent Epstein's death, whether it was suicide or foul play. The U.S. Department of Justice and the FBI launched investigations into the circumstances of Epstein's death, reflecting the high level of public and official concern surrounding the case.
“””
I don't know what's going on, but it's clear that there are vast sums of money going into illegal black programs beyond congressional oversight. I strongly suspect that Kirkpatrick's role is to deflect public interest and criticism in order to maintain the status quo. I don't trust a single word he says.
Regardless of whether or not there is alien life, our government should be forced to open up its secrets, whatever they may be. We don't need any of this to stay safe.
In 2009, the black budget was estimated to be over $50 billion [1]. It's so huge that the military industrial media complex designed, built, and operated an entire 100 jet wing of secret new fighters in the 1980's [2].
We can write anything; the differentiator is evidence. Certainly there are programs outside public oversight, but do we have evidence of the vast sums outside Congressional oversight? Where do they get the money if not from Congress? Do you have evidence of Kirkpatrick's role?
> our government should be forced to open up its secrets
That is generally the law (including the Freedom of Information Act), though there's overclassification by security agencies. Some things need to be classified, obviously, so what exactly are you advocating? How do we improve it?
We should repeal the National Security Act of 1947.
Nuclear weapons have proliferated to nine nations around the world since the passage of that act. The production of nuclear armaments is clearly limited by political will and industrial power, not knowledge.
The act protects a foreign policy establishment that has abused its power to conduct dirty tricks against other nations for decades in order to keep American elites rich and in power.
No one is going to invade the American homeland, given the vast oceans separating us from the rest of the world. Repealing that act and removing the foreign policy establishment from power would unwind our vast empire abroad and greatly improve our relations with other nations.
I would prefer that we do this cleanly, but unfortunately I think our empire will suffer a far messier fall from power over the coming decades. Empires at this stage flail wildly in their military adventures.
There's no need to "destroy" the entire foreign policy establishment. We just need to force them to operate without the secrecy and privileges they presently enjoy and exploit so they can be subject to the democratic process.
Surely this is better than to suffer more wars like Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.
EDIT (apparently my responses are being throttled): In response to wolverine876's question below, "How would secrecy be managed?"
We don't need any secrecy or statecraft. We're so large and established that we can do everything out in the open. Russia and China know where our missiles, bases, ships and submarines are, and we know where their are. The only people in the dark about everything are the citizens in both countries.
A similar argument was made against Linux when open-source was new. It turns out you don't need any closed source code at all to run a successful project.
Missile defense is a misnomer. The distinction between a defensive and offensive capability is meaningless in the context of arms races and mutually assured destruction. As we pour billions into shooting down ICBMs, China will pour billions into new delivery systems to evade that defense, and vice versa.
The net result is that money on all sides is taxed away from things that people actually need and want (food, shelter, medicine, schools, parks, the arts) and directed into things that either rust in silos and bases or kill us all.
The only way to stop an arms race is to increase transparency and to negotiate treaties with our peers.
Transparency is a double edged sword. You definitely want to hide some capability (ambiguity) otherwise the opponent can calculate what to do to win, and then just do that.
What we need is to minimize or eliminate the adversarial relationships between nations globally. The only winners of the present status quo are the elites in every nation.
That's heavily context dependent and it's a perspective that assumes that adversarial relationships emerge because both sides did something wrong. This naive appeasement mindset in the 1930s did more harm than good, for example. If you have a rival that's revisionist and aggressive, sometimes you need less cooperation and negotiation, and more war, in order to accelerate their demise. Of course, you usually don't want that, but as I said, it's context dependent.
I genuinely can't believe that you're doubling down on the idea that missile defense capability secrecy isn't necessary. Are you an actual spy? The secrecy is precisely what prevents the arms race.
Either they're lying about fake UFOs to manipulate the American public, or there really are UFOs and they've been lying about them for decades.
No matter which of these branches proves true, our government's rampant secrecy is illegitimate and offensive. We traded away good government for the illusion of safety in the nuclear age and we won't get it back until we organize to actually restrain our ruling elite.
If our goal in backing the Ukrainians was to weaken Russia, haven't we failed miserably? And how has pushing Russia and China into being allies helped America's interests?
It makes me sad that we allowed hundreds of billions in tax dollars to flow to American weapons makers even as millions of Americans are forced to sleep in tents on sidewalks.
The Russia-China thing is a super interesting topic. It was always the case that Russia needed a strong industrial power with which it could exchange its resources. Resources too big even for a strong Russian industrial base and for much of history its shipping capacity. The partner industrial power could only be either Germany (since the late 19th century) or China (since let's say the 1970s). Either one would do but China is now by any measure the more trustworthy partner. Done. Germany and Europe haven't even begun to feel the pain of their choice.
Government thinks that there are 580K homeless in the US. Also, most homeless don't sleep on the sidewalk. Most stay with friends and relatives. Lots sleep in shelters. The actual number is about 200K sleeping outside each night.
Plus, the people that make this argument don't actually want to help the homeless. They don't advocate giving the homeless money; $10k each would be $6 billion. Leaving plenty for Ukraine.
Our goal in backing Ukraine was to keep Ukrainians from being dead, or worse. And if you don't think there's such a thing as "worse", you weren't keeping up with the news from towns that the Russians took over.
It wasn't about weakening Russia. Russia is weakening itself, by putting so much of its economy and infrastructure into a fight that it can't win even with a much smaller opponent. It has destroyed its own army and demonstrated the inadequacy of its military technology.
It is, indeed, sad that the US has not solved its own homelessness and other problems. But pearl-clutching about that is just Russian trolling: we hadn't solved those problems before Russia attacked, either. And when Russia finally gives up in humiliation, we'll still have our own domestic problems. But not nearly as bad as the overwhelming incompetence, corruption, and horror of Putin's monstrosity.
Why is NewsGuard considered a trusted source, given their ties to the US intelligence establishment? The people that conned us about Iraqi WMD do not deserve the right to be the arbiters of what is deemed to be information.
The National Association of Realtors is the #1 lobbyist group in DC. Given the influence they have, the likelihood of any real change is unfortunately low. (I really hope the NAR loses. Good luck!)
It's a shame, because restrictions on housing supply are the biggest driver of inequality there is. An 80% improvement could be made on that front if we could somehow waive a magic wand and stop rewarding people for literal rent-seeking.
I don't care that my approach is harder for the developer, because the thing I care about is consistency and convenience for the user.
I know the thing you built is neat (I've spent quite a few years working on almost the same thing), but I guess this is why I gave up on pushing my own solution
reply