HackerLangs
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

voidpointer

no profile record

comments

voidpointer
·mês passado·discuss
To implement groove packing digitally, you don't need to put that process in the signal chain, do you? You can digitize the master, analyze it, and determine the required spacing at various points on the record. You then feed that information back to the machine to control the cutting processes, as the analog signal is transferred directly to the record. No digital buffer in the signal path.
voidpointer
·mês passado·discuss
I think this is just the way the decision tree works in safety-sensitive areas where many human lives are at stake. The catch-all in the decision tree, if there is no exact solution, is always the "get to safety at all costs" option. There will be some window of trying to resolve an issue (here: telling everyone to shut down devices) and when that does not resolve the issue, the catch-all kicks in. That's just the pattern and in an environment like an airplane, where margin for error is slim to non-existant, there is no deviation from that pattern.
voidpointer
·mês passado·discuss
In general and long-term I agree with what you are saying. I assume this was a new/unknown situation. (On the other hand, the article links to other similar stories, so maybe I am cutting them too much slack). If "electronic device names" are of concern, there should be an established protocol to deal with them. Especially if this keeps happening.
voidpointer
·mês passado·discuss
> Was any of this a good idea? No, probably not, but people need to calm down.

I can understand the safety concern - and I think the decision to turn around was ultimately the right call. Especially given that they had called for people turning off BT for some time.

The fact that the device was not turned off suggests to me that the owner did not know they were the cause of this. If they had done this by intent and were set on going through with it even after the turnaround was initiated, they would have also had the sense to drop the device into some other seat or leave it in the lavatory...

If it turns out they did this with full intent, there should be some _appropriate_ consequence
voidpointer
·mês passado·discuss
So, how did it eventually show up? Owner's phone goes off/airplane-mode, watch starts advertising; someone else wants to connect their BT headphones and sees the name of the watch?
voidpointer
·mês passado·discuss
According to the article, it was a Fitbit device belonging to a teenager... Chances are, the kid selected that nickname for the device a long while ago and forgot about it, and was probably unaware that the device was using Bluetooth at all, and that they should turn off their fitness tracker when the announcement came through...

At the same time, some people in the comments under the article are more or less calling for the death penalty for the kid...
voidpointer
·há 2 meses·discuss
Maybe you have a point there. An optimistic outlook would be that AI allows people to create content that can compete with the polished, mass-produced, standardized stuff without the prohibitive budget requirements. The pessimistic view is that it leads to more isolation, where everyone only "creates" for themselves.
voidpointer
·há 2 meses·discuss
Isn't the scenario you are describing the ultimate collapse of art and culture as we know it? If everyone sits at home and creates the content that they want, what do we talk about? How do we engage in shared culture if there is nothing to experience together?
voidpointer
·há 7 meses·discuss
Why is this relevant for understanding how the IP works or even tweaking it? Whatever is relevant for that matter will most certainly not be a modification to the Linux kernel that the android system is running. It will not fall under the GPL that the kernel is licensed under. Can someone explain why this dispute is worth having beyond a theoretical legal debate on whether they should hand out the particular source tree from which their kernel was built (if they even built it)?
voidpointer
·ano passado·discuss
Probably a silly question, but if you take this all the way and treat everything as a DB that is synchronized in the background, how do you manage access control where not every user/client is supposed to have access to every object represented in the DB? Where does that logic go? If you do it on the document level like figma or canvas, every document is a DB and you sync the changes that happen to the document but first you need access to the document/DB. But doesn't this whole idea break apart if you need to do access control on individual parts of what you treat as the DB because you would need to have that logic on the client which could never be secure...