Well they might want to produce some photos or screenshots of what it actually looks like when it displays ads. So far, they are only telling us what it doesn't look like, which doesn't instill much confidence. It should have been pretty easy for them to say "and here's what it actually looks like btw: [photo.jpg] [screenshot.png]". They didn't do that though. Why might that be?
Yeah, of course. When a "normal" person asks for a reasonable accommodation--like being able to wear a smooth cotton polo alternative they bought with their own money rather than the piqué fabric one assigned by the company--they get "wow you want to be so special and unique, no you need to wear the shirt assigned by the company and get over it." Is it any surprise that someone would want to go get an autism diagnosis or whatever else so they can... just wear the damn shirt that doesn't make them half-grimace at all the customers?
They're going to be accused of wanting the special and unique stamp in either case, but at least in the second one they can feel somewhat comfortable.
People will, of course, conjure up an unreasonable accommodation (in an attempt to paint all accommodations as unreasonable) in their head to try to justify why this sort of request can't be accommodated, which just increases the fuel for the desire to get the autism diagnosis.
Put another way, if people were a little more accepting, less only-slightly-weird people would be seeking these diagnoses.
lol they use LLMs to respond to support requests now and they don't seem to read what they're sending. I got an email from them where the LLM assumed I was the Gusto support representative:
> This was concerning to us, as we rely on Gusto to handle these automated compliance filings.
This was concerning to Gusto, as Gusto relies on Gusto to handle these automated compliance filings.
> A stored value that was a future time value yesterday could become a past time value tomorrow.
And that past time value can become a wrong time value if it was converted from a user's local time to UTC before a tzdata version change.
UTC only works for absolute time and accidentally works most of the time for wall time as perceived by humans. It's vaguely similar to how calculating money with floats accidentally works most of the time.
In either case, you still have to do a migration: you need to convert your old UTC stamp to a new one that represents the correct local time, or with what the grandparent proposed, just having it stored in the local time and converting it close to the time it actually occurs.
But the UTC -> UTC conversion is worse. You have to figure out which timezones changed in the new tzdata version, convert them to the new UTC value, then update tzdata. Most libraries seem to only support one tzdata version at any given time, so this is way more complex to me than just having the wall time stored so that it can be converted to the correct UTC value at "decision time".
> just having the wall time stored so that it can be converted to the correct UTC value at "decision time"
Well, this isn't unambiguous in all cases either unfortunately: 1:30 AM in Houston, TX (Central Time) on 3-Nov-2024 could be either 0630Z (Central Daylight Time) or 0730Z (Central Standard Time), since the clocks will have fallen back.
Yes, but it's vastly less ambiguous: ambiguity for one day between 1:00AM - 3:00AM out of the year vs ambiguity for all future dates and times.
Now you can prompt the user for their intent when the time change is known or expected. The ambiguity is now narrowed down to only the situations where the time change could not have been known in advance.
I remember pointing this out to someone who said public transportation was unprofitable and his response was "I don't care".
People tend not to point it out because most don't actually care about the profitability at all, it's just a meme opinion they present because they prefer cars and look at it like a competition. Other meme opinions that get used:
- disabled people need cars and you want to take cars away from them! (fake disability advocacy - disability advocates who have spent 10 minutes thinking about this know that disability is a spectrum and that many disabilities prevent people from being able to use cars or they are unable pay for the necessary modifications to be able to drive; also no one said anything about taking cars away from people)
- cyclists are a danger to pedestrians and cars! (rhetorical trick to get people to think bikes pose a greater danger to pedestrians than cars)
- buses are ugly! (so is your car)
- it increases traffic (so does your car)
- not everyone wants to ride a bike/walk/take the bus (no one said you have to)
They say these things even in non-adversarial contexts. Like in a discussion about wanting more pedestrian infrastructure and bike paths, they will say "just use [existing bike path], some of us have JOBS and ERRANDS to run" as if people only walk/bike for leisure. No, you don't understand, I'm trying to get as far away from the horrible drivers with Texas/Florida plates as possible!!
What do you mean by lack of citations? You mean self-linking to their own content? All the other alternatives, including the one you said "is a better source", do the exact same thing. I am having a hard time finding the ideological bias you're talking about in the El País article.
The CNBC article is actually the best, since it corroborates its numbers with their own price research.
Perhaps this is just coming from a finance background. But I’m not a fan of folks quoting numbers from “financial reports” without saying what report they’re citing.
> having a hard time finding the ideological bias you're talking about in the El País article
To be clear, I don’t allege this article has a bias. Just that I’m going to be sceptical of a paper calling something out that aligns with their priors.
I see what you mean now. The CNBC article does a better job at discussing the technical impacts, while both the NPR and El País are more oriented toward social impacts.
What is most surprising to me is the price increase for dairy products. I wonder how much of that increase, if any, is caused by tariffs vs other factors.
Why? Because the prosecutor doesn't want all their work to go to waste because they didn't disclose Brady evidence. Even if they successfully argue that Officer Flock's reporting isn't exculpatory, they still have to do extra work to respond to a Brady motion for a case that already got a conviction.
In cases of parallel construction of evidence, is the prosecution still obligated to disclose everything to the defense in discovery? Is the tree from which the Fruit is picked only obscured from the jury, or from the defense as well?
Any evidence the prosecutor uses that is potentially exculpatory must be disclosed to the defendant. So your questions raise why they wouldn't: they think the defense can't find out. And it's arguably likely that they won't. But if they do, it will not only invalidate that single case, it could potentially trigger retrials of hundreds of cases because now a bunch of people know that Officer Flock is on the Brady list.
And one final thing about this... the prosecutor (who has probably said some variation of "ignorance of the law is not an excuse" to try to get a conviction) can't claim ignorance as a defense to a Brady violation. Failing to disclose, whether they knew or not, is a Brady violation.
Hah, as an ex-Flock employee, their transparency report is utter garbage. "Agencies using Flock." In my immediate vicinity, three County Sheriffs use it, but they are not listed. Several city PDs in my county also use it, but they are not listed.
"In a world" is a figure of speech which acknowledges the non-universality of the statement being made. And no it is not "just the USA". Canada and Mexico are similarly slow to adopt real-time payments.
It is wild to tell someone "don't assume" when your entire comment relies on your own incorrect assumption about what someone meant.
There is better commentary on the same basic point regarding SEPA / Faster Payments / FedNow and how the US lags world-leading practice in the other thread here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44738579
It's a bit more substantial, and less complaints about the semantics of the wording.
> Whether you’re debugging your first NullPointerException or architecting enterprise systems, there’s always someone willing to help you grow.
> Whether you’re starting your programming journey or looking to add a robust, reliable language to your toolkit, Java remains one of the best investments you can make in your technical future.
I wish people would be more thoughtful about how they used LLMs.
reply