You're glad that you have to pay lawyers for a decade to get some recourse?
A more generous interpretation of their comment is that they are glad that some legal precedence has been set. The same case would not go through courts for another decade.
Readit Newsjemorya commented on French court issues damages award for violation of GPL heathermeeker.com/2024/02... · Posted by u/bookstore-romeo
jemorya commented on Coffee drinking linked to lower mortality risk, new study finds nytimes.com/2022/06/01/we... · Posted by u/mistersquid
>That kind of work is hard, expensive, and likely to be fruitless.
Don't forget that the "fruit" for scientists is fame, not the truth. Anything that can get headlines and conference talks is a good thing, regardless of whether or not the methodology even makes sense.
>Don't forget that the "fruit" for scientists is fame, not the truth.
This is a pretty shocking thing to say. It's not true whatsoever for the field of physics. Is there a particular field or a particular experience you're reacting to? I think I'm overreacting to how general your statement is.
Here's a link for something I use on such news and blog sites: https://alisdair.mcdiarmid.org/kill-sticky-headers/
I works a surprising amount of the time!
I use this every single day on my locked-down work laptop. It fixes so many sites! I recommend it as often as I can, and I'm surprised that its use is not more widespread.
jemorya commented on Most-streamed track of the day by country worldspotify.com/... · Posted by u/sebastien-lbn
By definition, a popular thing will appeal to the lowest common denominator. I don't mean this in a derogatory way; not "to the average dumb person" but "to something we all share". I think as a consequence of that, popular music will be simple, easily consumable, have very little impact on an individual, and be easily forgotten / make room for the next one.
David Foster Wallace makes the same observation in his article "E Unibus Pluram: Television and U.S. Fiction," which I read in the excellent "A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again" collection of some of his essays.
jemorya commented on Why Adventure Games Suck (1989) grumpygamer.com/why_adven... · Posted by u/networked
Tangential question, does anyone have any tips for someone who has lost all interest in video games?
I used to like them as a teenager and whenever I pick up a game now (I'm in my early 40's) I am just completely bored. Part of it I think is because it requires some form of mental engagement after a day's hard work?
After a little more than a decade away from video games, I'm finding myself really enjoying 1st person horror games with no combat element: Soma, Amnesia: Dark Descent, and Outlast. This didn't really exist before, at least not games that were so immersive and terrifying.
Soma is especially great. It's utterly scary, it's beautiful to explore (per my taste), and the way the story unfolds really pulled me in.
SubNautica somewhat qualifies if you have a hint of thalassophobia. There is a very small combat element that you can entirely ignore.
Most other games bore my adult self as well, but the above are so compelling that I only play them in the right conditions so that I really enjoy them: alone at night with headphones.
jemorya commented on Physicists finally nail the proton’s size, eliminating an anomaly quantamagazine.org/physic... · Posted by u/theafh
That is an excellent question!
The definition is somewhat arbitrary, but still has some real physical significance. In actual fact, a proton is a field, so it doesn't have sharp boundaries. But the amplitude of the field still dies off very rapidly with distance from the center, so you can pick some arbitrary small value and say "the point at which the amplitude becomes less than this value is the radius of the proton". What matters is not really the number that you get out of this, but the fact that the experimental results of measuring this value appeared to change in the presence of muons. This was a phenomenon that was not predicted by present theory, and if it had held up, would have been a major breakthrough. One of the biggest problems in physics right now is that there are no experiments (except possibly this one) whose results are at odds with the Standard Model. That makes it hard to improve the model!
There are some really good responses to lisper's post: what about 96% of the universe's mass, neutrino mass, what about gravity for that matter. (zing!)
The thing about those particular questions is that they only tell us that the standard model is incomplete. Gravity exists. The fact that it's not in the standard model doesn't necessarily mean that the model is broken, just that gravity needs to be added somehow.
What we need more of are instances where the standard model makes a precise numeric prediction and it's dead wrong. That puts a spotlight on every piece of the standard model that went into the prediction.
(Edited for the pun I didn't intend.)
jemorya commented on NASA’s Lunar Space Station Is a Great/Terrible Idea spectrum.ieee.org/aerospa... · Posted by u/howard941
The catch 22 is any experiment that you can only do in microgravity is also only really relevant in microgravity. That’s fine if we have a larger goal, but not really useful on it’s own.
Sure simply learning this stuff is interesting, but the costs are so extreme it’s effectively a vanity project.
I'm not sure that the information from such experiments is only really relevant to applications in microgravity environments. (Hopefully I'm not misunderstanding your point too much.)
The data points from microgravity experiments don't exist in isolation; presumably there are data points for similar experiments at surface gravity. Removing gravity from a system could say very much about how gravity affects the system, and thus how the system works on Earth.
We also might discover effects so important that it would be worth going to microgravity to get them. Stepping out into the unknown just to learn how it works is important.
(Disclaimer: I know jack about what kind of microgravity experiments are going on.)
Young Adult stories are stories that are often where the protagonists are coming-of-age, still dealing with school or part-time jobs, parents are significant in their lives, etc. The themes are often coming-of-age, finding suitable mentors (and avoiding villanous mentors), new love, etc.
I'd suggest:
The City Of Ember
Akata Witch
The Hate U Give
The Sun Is Also A Star
There's also the ones most people know: Silverwing (more children's literature), Harry Potter, Holes...
Earthsea by Ursula Le Guin
> As Stephen Frears, the director of High Fidelity, worked to translate the best moments of the Nick Hornby novel on which the movie was based, he found to his surprise that the best moments were the voice-overs, especially the direct speeches of Rob Gordon (John Cusack) to the camera.
> Frears said, “What we realized was that the novel was a machine to get to twelve crucial speeches in the book about romance and art and music and list-making and masculine distance and the masculine drive for art and the masculine difficulty with intimacy.”
> This is the case for most novels: you have to read seven hundred pages to get the handful of insights that were the reason the book was written, and the apparatus of the novel is there as a huge, elaborate, overbuilt stage set.
>>This is the case for most novels: you have to read seven hundred pages to get the handful of insights that were the reason the book was written, and the apparatus of the novel is there as a huge, elaborate, overbuilt stage set.
This is a pet peeve of mine in any type of art, especially installation art or sculpture where a clear and simple point can be quite literally expanded into a elaborate and overbuilt set that doesn't add to the impact. Or worse, obfuscates the original idea.
But then there's an explorative type of art where the method and the process is much more meaningful than the insight or punchline that the novel may have been built around. The Waves by Virginia Woolf, for example.
(edited to use my words more good)
Exploration and Exploitation, as so often. If you explore much, you'll also learn more likely which books are worth diving into. (Or go for readers digest and similar stuff and then read the real book if the summary is any good)
I was about to post the same view (though I hadn't bumped into Exploration vs Exploitation before).
One year I decided to blow through as many books as I could, and the next year I took my time and re-read the interesting ones much more closely. If I hadn't spend the previous year getting through as many as I could, I wouldn't have found even half of the interesting ones.
There is a middle ground between consuming as much as possible and carefully reading every book.