When I broke my collarbone on my dominant arm I learned Dvorak left-handed layout a QMK keyboard. I configured some layers to make all the symbols needed for programming easy to access, and hold-space-for-shift. I learned the layout using Epistory, a typing game. There’s several similar games now that look helpful. It was slower but workable.
A braille embosser is pretty much the soundtrack to my childhood (along with the dectalk pronouncing “c colon backslash greater-than”). My dad is blind and I’m so appreciative of the technologies that helped him succeed alongside his sighted colleagues. I also credit his love of technology for my own career.
The above is essentially a comedy sketch intended to demonstrate the different voice synthesizers that were available at the time. Raised Dot wanted to provide listeners with multiple options to receive the newsletter in their preferred voice. Keep in mind, this was all done painstakingly on tape!
It’s totally winnable! The player almost always has a chance to avoid death. Deaths are usually due to missing knowledge or laziness/impatience. The knowledge is really really hard to gain without wikis, and I absolutely wouldn’t have ascended without wikis, but reading them added another layer of fun for me.
Your phrase “discussing sexual content” strikes me as really odd. If you discuss a “traditional” relationship with a 5 year old, you’re already discussing sexual content on the same level & terms that you would use if you were talking about sexual orientation and gender identity.
What you’re describing is the scam, and that’s become the definition, but “NFTs” in general do have more potential than that, even if it’s crowded out by bullshit. NFTs make more sense where a token’s utility is implemented in the same system as its ownership. For example, a domain name is an NFT, and there’s an ethereum name service: https://docs.ens.domains/ - ownership of a domain allows you to configure the domain.
I’d wager most people purchasing art NFTs don’t really have a good understanding of what they’re buying. Some think the art lives on-chain, or that if the art lives on IPFS it is a blockchain-based permanent thing (it’s not, data only exists in IPFS as long as >0 people “pin” it, and artists engage in pin rings to pin each other’s art).
So I see potential value of NFTs in general, though I don’t think the value is necessarily good. You could make the argument that art NFTs are like a MVP to see how ownership of different kinds of things in a distributed system works. I’m very skeptical because it’s attempting to create artificial scarcity of digital media, and if they figure it out for real, I can see that going wrong in more ways than I can see it going right.
This seems like a leap. Admin has increased 45% in the same time faculty has increased 56%. And the timeframe is 20 years. Is there too much bureaucracy? I don’t know. But I don’t think this article is enough to say so. The faculty quotes don’t offer any concrete information, unless you’ve already decided what you’re going to believe, I guess.
I definitely have already decided what I'm going to believe, and I read this article as confirming my prior beliefs. But it's not just universities--government agencies and large corporations (both of which I've worked at and with) both seem to fall into the practice of "defending a huge pipeline of cash flow and allowing the properly-credentialed to siphon off larger amounts". It's not just the increase in administration that's lead to this; I would say that the increase in administration is actually a symptom of this.
There’s a dead comment with a negative take about the YouTube comments being turned off, and I just wanted to point out - the conf is hosted in a really cool custom real-time conference mud, built by em lazer-walker. It’s a fun thing that is worth checking out
MIT pushes for charges, not JSTOR, according to the following accounts.
> After his arrest, JSTOR released a statement saying that though it considered Swartz's access to be a "significant misuse" committed in an "unauthorized fashion," it would not pursue civil litigation against him;[16][38] MIT did not comment on the proceedings.[39]
> Marty Weinberg, who took the case over from Good, said he nearly negotiated a plea bargain in which Swartz would not serve any time. "JSTOR signed off on it," he said, "but MIT would not."[50]
Any mathematical instruction I have found helpful has had a big emphasis on building “intuition“. This post was the first explanation I encountered that explained floating point encoding in a way that was immediately relatable and understandable to me. There are multiple ways to describe a thing, different people have different relationships to a thing which may make some descriptions more well-suited than others, and different people have different goals.
Such a good writer. His Wolfenstein book had the best explanation I’ve ever seen for how floating point numbers are encoded, and that explanation is in the first several pages. If you don’t have an understanding of floating point encoding, that alone is worth the purchase price.
Am I alone in thinking that the sign, exponent and mantissa model makes more sense, and that (-1)^S * 1.M * 2^(E-127) isn't that hard to understand? Maybe because I already understand that model, but his explanation just made it more confusing for me.
