Readit Newsnairteashop commented on How Does Timecode Vinyl Work? (Pt. 3) mixxx.org/news/2025-08-27... · Posted by u/SamWhited
This is for that DJ thing where DJs use record players which use dummy records that just have position info, I think. Then that data is fed to something that indexes into the audio file, giving the illusion of DJ spinning and scratching effects. This allows DJs to pretend they are using "vinyl". Is that right?
That's correct (I used to mess around with this stuff several years back). There's a bit more detail in part 1 of this series as well:
https://mixxx.org/news/2021-11-21-dvs-internals-pt1/
Genuinely curious: what part of the federal government's letter to Harvard seems fascist to you?
Is the government asking a university to shift their bias away from skin color diversity to viewpoint diversity fascist?
Is there a historical parallel?
Or is it just the fact that the government is asking for reform, and any reform request would be considered fascist? If so, do you also consider the DEI reform requests fascist?
Let's set aside specific terms like "fascist" for now. Below is one of the demands from the government:
> the University shall commission an external party, which shall satisfy the federal government as to its competence and good faith, to audit the student body, faculty, staff, and leadership for viewpoint diversity, such that each department, field, or teaching unit must be individually viewpoint diverse.
Do you feel this is ok for the government to demand of an educational institution? This isn't about specific political ideologies. If the Biden administration had threatened to withhold funding from a university because, for example, their hiring policies weren't left-leaning enough or something, it would be equally outrageous.
nairteashop commented on Servant Leadership Theory pon.harvard.edu/daily/lea... · Posted by u/Bluestein
> #1 was always keeping the company's interests in mind
While I understand your intent on saying this, I think the reaction you get is because that is essentially a Sycophant which historically for the past known duration of human history has thrown vulnerable people under the bus in order to make the powerful more powerful.
I think what you probably want to say is that as a manager you should balance the 3. If you have to sacrifice the wellbeing of your employees or yourself for the company, well maybe the company isn't worth it. Also your employees probably don't like knowing you are making sacrifices for them instead of setting boundaries for yourself in order to take care of yourself. Nobody likes a martyr.
Especially in the tech world were theoretically you can leave a job and find a new one that doesn't conflict with this balance.
The general view in 2024 at least in my circles is to establish boundaries, find balance. Not blindly make the company your "#1 priority" in every decision.
The way I interpret "#1 Company, #2 Team, #3 Me" is that faced with a decision that benefits the company as a whole (i.e., all teams at the company) one that benefits only your team or you, you should favor the decision that benefits everyone.
For example, say your team has a huge hardware budget, and you notice another fledgling team that's working on something potentially more impactful to the company is struggling to get a decent budget. Ideally, you should transfer most or all of your budget over to them to benefit the company overall. (Mind you, I have never really seen this happen voluntarily, but again... we're talking about ideal/desirable behavior.)
It does not mean that if the company is acting in bad faith and is, for example, putting policies in place to force people to quit to save on severance or something, you go along with that and throw your team under the bus.