My computer certainly does more than the one 27 years ago did, in the senses of operations it performs in a second, capacity of data storage, increased intercommunication options, increased selection of devices that I can interface with it, and so on. Some of these are just a change in magnitude, and the changes in the software are just as important as changes in the hardware.

There are more parts of the computer (again, both hardware and software) that are undocumented. Taken as a whole, the system is more capable, but closed hardware and software makes me wonder about capabilities in my computer that serve someone that isn't me.

I don't think it's trespassing for the players to be at Kijkduin, just problematic to have people there in those numbers. The players may be making individually-acceptable choices, and it's just the collective behavior that's a problem. It's easy to say that people should have the judgement not to do some individually-harmful thing. It's harder to argue that individuals should have the judgement not to partake in a harmful collective behavior (humans just aren't generally good at considering things like that).

Niantic's algorithms are sending people around in a pattern that is causing damage. Since they've been made aware of that, and it's difficult to blame the individual players, it's reasonable to ask the company itself to make a change. Niantic's the only one in a position to solve the problem quickly and cheaply.

Agreed. Ditto for most of Europe. Everyone should standardize on YMD. Lexical sorting and least-to-most specific times make the most sense.

I see people complain about the low power of the Pi3...then I think about how I went through college with a slower computer than that, and how the people over the previous 30 years had even slower machines to use (if they had their own personal machine at all).

What you can do with a couple MHz and a few hundred KB of memory is great, given a little ingenuity. Of course, you aren't going to do real-time face recognition on something like that, but 99% of what we need to do is just fine with 0.1% of the performance.

That's the point. They're saying that those 85% of self-made American millionaires aren't as "self-made" as they claim.

Like me: I could talk about starting with almost nothing in my bank accounts, getting a job, working through the ranks, buying a home, and working toward my first million... conveniently leaving out all the advantages that I've had to get me to this point (cultural expectation that I'd go to college instilled in me from a young age, a family well-off enough to support that financially, uninterrupted time to work on the hobbies that grew into a career, etc).

Quanticle seems to be relating the origins of Donald Trump and Bill Gates. Donald describes his fortune as self-made. Bill Gates has been described as self-made. It's true, if you only consider that their wealth is much greater than any gift they've ever received. It's false from the perspective that anyone could do it with enough hard work.

But IME is distinct from "Intel TXT & UEFI Secure Boot" ("this"'s referent).

> Intel didn't force [Intel TXT & UEFI Secure Boot] upon the consumers

is true. Both of those things can be disabled on most hardware. In fact, I disabled them on the laptop the I just bought, because I wanted to install OSes that aren't SecureBoot signed.

It sounds like you operate how I usually do; the communication cost outweighs the benefits of collaboration, and it ends up being a tiring and frustrating experience.

I've seen pair teams working correctly, though. Each of them bounces ideas off the other one, and they progress faster than either would've alone. It's like racing two algorithms against each other, each searching a different part of the problem space, and using the first result that's returned. It lets them move on to the next problem quicker.

I don't usually do that very well, but I can't deny that if you've got the right pair of developers, it's a very powerful technique.