Well, that feels like a rather extreme jump to conclusions, and was certainly not something I thought the GP comment was even suggesting.
I don't see any reason why people couldn't adjust from meeting friends at restaurants to hosting friends at home instead. (Unless, of course, your living space is limited)
If you aren't cooking and cleaning up after, what's the difference between that and meeting someone at a restaurant?
> If you aren't cooking and cleaning up after, what's the difference between that and meeting someone at a restaurant?
I wonder if you realise how dystopian your life already is to consider this question reasonable.
There is a difference between a co-located set of siloed people and a community. The inability to recognise this means your community is already broken.
I suppose our restaurant-going experiences must significantly differ. If I'm going to a restaurant with friends for social interaction, it typically doesn't involve the other people in the restaurant who just happen to be there at the same time as me.
If I wanted that, I would go to a bar instead, which is a separate conversation from the one we were having.
However, I don't think I would be so bold as to call either of our lifestyles 'broken'. That feels like a needless attack.
> You are an idiot narcissist, unable to comprehend that other people might not hold the same values as you. This defect in you, the inability to recognize that other people might want different things than you, will forever render you unable to connect with people at large.
I wonder if you see the irony?
Ultimately, my comment refers not to individual values, but truisms of the human condition, backed by decades of research by sociologists and psychologists.
> Your judgemental attitude combined with your deep conviction that everybody else is in the wrong, rather than you, guarantees that you will die a lonely misanthrope.
I wonder if the reality would disappoint you? Or if you're hoping for this outcome?
> Your abrasive, insulting communication style ensures that nobody will ever truly love you.
Again the irony is palpable. I wonder how you react to disagreements in person if this is your reaction to a well-reasoned but provocative comment that offends you.
> Also, you are, in general, a shit person.
Are you of the calibre of person to judge others?
> All of this might sound over the top and a mean attack, but it’s not. Instead, it is accurate and sympathetic.
It may in fact be accurate, if the subject is the author.
I don't understand the distinction you are making: two couples (4 people) meeting at a restaurant is, to me, equally social as one couple going to another couple's house to eat dinner.
With respect, you're making your own feelings clear. I'm not ascribing any emotion to you.
However, it is clear you lack the perspective to understand how globally unusual or fundamentally broken your community and your interactions with it are.
As someone who used to work at Microsoft, this is spot on. The sheer amount of arrogance coming from (some of) my peers who worked there was incredible.
Microsoft decides for you how you would like to use your computer. If you don't agree, use Linux. Or Mac, but Apple is really no better than Microsoft with regard to arrogance.
I'd say Apple is even more arrogant, but at least their software is arrogantly functional.
Maybe I could look past this sleep nonsense if their super cool new sleep actually worked. But it just doesn't, instead it cooks your laptop 10% of the time and it you open it up and it's dead.
The reconstruction is a 3-dimensional scene that has animation contained in it.
You can move a virtual camera 3-dimensionally within the scene at any individual frame (x, y, z), and also move the scene through its animation to play the animation forwards and backwards (in other words, you move the camera through the 'time' axis).
> in other words, you move the camera through the 'time' axis
So, like the scrubber in any video? Doesn’t feel like that warrants the 4D moniker. Which is not to say you’re not right, I think you are and that’s what they mean, but it that being the case it feels more buzzword than anything.
Yes, it’s like a video scrubber. But it’s perhaps more like the timeline in Blender/Maya, and maybe even Cinema4D ;)
You are correct though, they both serve the same function.
However, I’ve yet to see a video player that lets you reposition the camera as if you were using photo mode in a video game. That’s (essentially) what this thing offers.
I think it means that, given a normal flat 2D video, you get back that video but as a 3D scene, meaning you can move and pan the camera around as the 3d video plays.
And I guess they call it 4D since you had a flat 2d video + time dimension, so 3d video + time dimension = 4 dimensions.
I wonder how difficult it would be to make a website that, instead of serving 404's, a model does a semantic search using the nonexistent URL to come up with a URL that actually does exist and most closely matches the "intent" of the invalid one.
Not too hard, if the site already has some kind of a search engine, it can feed the URL to the search engine.
The safe thing to do is return a 404 with a few suggested links.
The problem is that "guessing" the intent of the URL will have unintended consequences. A URL will no longer be guaranteed to point to what you think it points to. This fundamentally breaks the assumption of what a URL is.
How could this happen?
1: Site creates article foo.com/chocolate_bars
2: Someone accidentally links to foo.com/cocoa_bars, which serves foo.com/chocolate_bars
3: Site creates article foo.com/coco_bars
4: Now foo.com/cocoa_bars serves foo.com/coco_bars
Yes, this sounds like a nightmare. Also pity poor archive.org if they try to archive a web site set up like this - every URL will resolve to a valid page.
My thought was to serve a 307 (or some other redirect HTTP code, clearly I am not a web developer) instead of a 404, not to serve the found content “as” the url that didn’t exist.
But agreed this would not be good general practice. It was mostly a thought experiment.
I've been learning me some Swift and coming from C# I feel somewhat spoiled when it comes to timing things.
In C# native Stopwatch class is essentially all you need for simple timers with sub-millisecond precision.
Swift has not only the entire table of options from TFA to choose from, but also additional ones like DispatchTime [0]. They might all boil down to the same thing (mach_absolute_time, according to the article), but from the perspective of someone trying to learn the language, it's all a little confusing.
Especially since there's also hidden bottlenecks like the one this post is about.
