To be clear, you’re advocating for women to lose the right to vote? The misogyny in this thread was disappointing already, but seeing this comment being voted up is maybe a sign I should not be on this website any more.
The article points out that the problem is deeper than this:
> Once I compared my personalized sloper to commercial patterns and retail garments, I had a revelation: clothes were never made to fit bodies like mine. It didn’t matter how much weight I gained or lost, whether I contorted my body or tried to buy my way into styles that “flatter” my silhouette, there was no chance that clothes would ever fit perfectly on their own.
I was surprised at the audible difference it made to reset the RNG seed for the hi-hat noise function every time it triggered. I’m curious what the justification for doing this is—does the randomness arise from the geometry of the hi-hat itself and not the way you hit it? Is the idea to imitate the sound of sample-based percussion?
He’s also built a popular movement invested in getting his policies implemented. He may not “control the busses” as an individual government official, but his movement can pressure the people who do.
Apple relies on internal feedback and executive reviews rather than user testing. They likely received a lot of different feedback internally, but the execs decided to ship it anyway. I think they would rather ship something half-baked than change the yearly release process that has been continuously operating since the early days of iOS, and at the scale of the whole platform, it's hard to turn back once you've committed to making the changes.
This sounds nice until you think more closely about the framing implicit in “follow the rules and make the nation better”. Who makes the rules and defines what is good for a nation?
It’s frustrating to have to find the right place to report a bug, learn the specific format the project is expecting, then have the bug closed by a “stale bot” after a few weeks. I wish there were an independent, cross-product bug tracker that focused on cataloguing and diagnosing bugs for the benefit of users rather than on tracking work for the benefit of the developer.
The problem with adult-only transition is that it dooms trans people (at least, those who go on HRT) to go through two puberties, which has visible physical effects that then have to be undone or worked around (breast growth, facial hair, deeper voice, etc.). The ideal for most people is that you'd just go through one.
One possible resolution is that these interests are male-dominated not because of an inherent gender-based preference, but because women (or, more precisely, people who are perceived to be women) are excluded from them. Trans women who are still perceived as men are able to avoid some of these exclusionary processes, and they maintain their interest even after they start to be seen as women.
I think games are more like instruments than they are like music. The game itself isn't as interesting as the gameplay you can perform inside it. Speedrunning in particular has a lot in common with musical performance.
Isn't the interpreter code itself data in the sense that it has no meaning without something (a machine) to run it? How do you avoid having to send an interpreter for the interpreter and so on?
Thanks for the answer! It seems like there's a distinction here between exploring how models can/should be built (a mathematical/philosophical task), helping people create and understand these models with computers (a design/engineering task), and using these models to formulate and test hypotheses about ourselves and the world (a scientific task). Maybe the lack of science is because we haven't figured out the math/philosophy/design/engineering parts yet!
I guess I'm thinking about this from the perspective of someone trying to make a computer for the general public. How will you convince anyone to buy and use a computer that can't browse the web?
(And I doubt this is a problem that will go away with time; the web is big enough that it seems unlikely to go anywhere anytime soon.)
In physics, you can tell you're making progress because you can explain more things that happen in nature. How can you tell when you're making progress in computer science?
To me it seems like "computer science" lumps together too many different goals. It's like if we had a field called "word science" that covered story-writing, linguistics, scientific publication, typesetting, etc.