Agree with your second statement. I work at a semiconductor startup. Both the CEO and the CTO are excellent folks. Kind, extremely competent, hardworking, and reasonable; I love my time spent interacting with them.
The NASA article on the probe mentions its autonomous course corrections abilities. Does anyone have an idea about what kind of onboard CPUs/SoCs do probes like this employ? Which ISAs? How about other hardware like memory and storage? And what kind of programming languages are used to code such internal "systems".
I'm very curious to see if someone can shed some more light on this.
I'd say much has changed since he wrote that, and even for the time it contains some odd advice which he tries to force down the throat of the reader, but I'd be more interested to hear other's thoughts on the article.
> These techniques cannot be used by a person who have to walk a dog early every morning, help his son to go to a school and work with complex code base.
Of course they can. Just not by you. Mutual exclusion does not apply here.
Very interesting! I'm always amazed at kind of creative work I come across on here. Did not expect to read a success story about generating imagery for thermal printers this morning, but I'm glad I did.
Btw, what do you mean "without a driver". Do you bundle code that talks to thermal printers in you app? Is there a standardized communication protocol in this space or do you maintain a breadth of custom implementations?
Slightly tangential, but I got curious how is Google selling the whole "Privacy" Sandbox idea. Found this little nugget right on the homepage[1]:
"Tailored content is critical for the open web and this includes showing people relevant ads."
Regardless of the amount of word-soccer they play (including in the article linked above), it is visible how scummy of a corporation Google is in the current day.
> It's like having a big family dinner with your crazy uncle Bob who spends the entire meal working themselves up into an angry froth spouting a vast assortment of conspiracy theories.
Is it, though? To me, this is a rather absurd equivalence.
There's a significant amount of buildup before the "Vizio" bit, but it's presented in a structured format, helps establish context about the "issue", and is backed by credible references at every step. A time-constrained reader might not find this to be the most friendly writeup, but that's a separate discussion about the authour's writing style, which has no relation to the analogy you presented.
At some point last year, amidst the skyrocketing popularity of the app and WhatsApp coming under heat for various reasons, someone at Telegram thought of a fantastic (read: user-hostile) way to "increase engagement" - Show a persistent panel on the home screen with the name of every contact on your phone who uses Telegram, in the hopes that you would click one of them and engage them in a conversation.
It's such a wild invasion of UI that it continues to blow my mind that it was greenlit. The panel cannot be disabled and lives right underneath your chat list where it has no business of appearing. They refused to remove it or at the very least, make it optional, and instead asked everyone to use their suggested workaround which, spoiler alert, isn't applicable for a large userbase [1]. I had to revoke "Contacts" permission to get rid of the panel.
This single change has made me quite bitter about the direction of Telegram.
I can empathize with this to some extent. I realized that homebrew is too slow and bloaty for me, so I decided to write an alternative from scratch (also meant as a learning project).
Eventually got discouraged by the sheer amount of real-world workarounds and corner cases that need to be accomodated rather than some inexplicable technical hurdle. And broke up with my long-time girlfriend.
Now I have little desire to go back, and things just feel meh. I play basketball sometimes to keep my sanity.