As a NoScript user, I see a lot of similar content served via websites as well.
The ideal case is that a website gracefully degrades with JS disabled. That's largely a pipe dream with React usage being what it is, but some sites manage it. Github is one who still does this well.
The nonideal case is that I'm presented with a misrendered site, but I can still see some semantic information that may, or may not, be what I was looking for. Gitlab's an example of this.
The worst case comes where the site white-screens and doesn't load _anything_ of use. Reddit is an example where it loads nothing but a loading image. My worst pet peeve is the Stack Overflow-style failure mode, though, which explicit says: "Enable JavaScript and cookies to continue.", rather than making any attempt to show any content at all, which is most similar to what the author here is describing.
I skip these websites too.
And also skipping websites that ask for cookie permissions in a malicious way.
It is just not the kind of people/content I want to be around and therefore not worth my time.
I am wondering myself, if I am the only one doing this.
Out of curiosity is that just "modern" reddit or old reddit too? (However long old reddit sticks around, anyway, it's clearly not long for this world after they began requiring a login to use it so if the login page requires JS then it's kind of moot)
Sorry, but the ideal case is that a website gracefully upgrades with JS enabled.
But sadly every one site on the net should both:
render in less than 50ms - to be in the top chart in AdSense, even if there is no such need
download everything and load everything so it would render the right way instantly - even if there are a literal hundred of the requests[0], again to improve the ranking in the AdSense
actually should load a full content of the page (hit F12 on [0]) on the first or second request but delay the display with an utterly stupid CSS animation what would spin until the last tidbit is downloaded and loaded - because fuck you visitor, especially if your connection is anything but absolutely perfect.[1]
and it's need to dynamically load the parts of the page even if all the content fits in less than 8kBytes - because dynamic! progressive! fuck you, user!
Like you can replace that bullshit at [0] with a tiny page content, tiny CSS file and do the shenanigans with JS shit later - but hey! that means somebody would for 5ms actually see the actual content before it would be mangled to a stupid dynamic shit with a pseudo mobile mode on a 4k landscape monitor!
[1] yes it's actually four points there - because even so called 'web programmers' nowadays don't know what the actual stack they use. And yes, the first and second point and even third - they are all contradicts themselves.
I was briefly involved with WITR during my undergrad. Loved what they were doing, but at that time the station definitely bought into the hipster attitude, music you've never heard of and will never hear again.
The only band I can remember hearing on WITR, then hearing anywhere else, is Neon Indian. They also sponsored a concert with Viva Brother, which briefly got some airplay on other stations, in spite of never (to my knowledge) having played them.
Well, sort of. My radio presets back in the 2000s were 101.7 WFNX, 104.1 WBCN, 107.3 WAAF, 100.7 WZLX, and 92.9 WBOS. Of those stations, only WZLX remains.
The greats - in my opinion, WBCN and WFNX - are long off the air. They were powerhouses of culture, both local and national. WFNX was the first to play Nirvana's Nevermind; Bono of U2 once said that "...without BCN, we'd all be (expletive)'d, let's face it."
Oedipus, a well-known Boston DJ since the 70s (who got started at 88.1 WMBR, MIT's station) and program director at WBCN, said of it: "The Telecommunications Act of 1996 destroyed radio... Corporations were now allowed to own multiple stations in the same market and across the country. Stations were no longer programmed locally."
Meanwhile, WAAF went online-only in 2020. WBOS got delegated to an HD2 subchannel in 2004. Likewise, The Boston Globe picked up many of the radio personalities for the online-only RadioBDC, now Indie617, but that seemed dead by the mid-2010s. I hear the former WFNX DJs Henry Santoro and Julie Kramer may still have some limited presence on 89.7 WGBH.
I was recently happy to find Adam 12 (formerly of WFNX (formerly of WBCN)) still DJing on 105.7 WROR.
88.9 WERS (Emerson College's station) is doing a great job of carrying the helm of Boston music culture. Occasionally I'll also tune into 90.3 WZBC (Boston College's station), which is a more "traditional" and less "commercial" college radio station.
Just outside Boston are likewise some public and community stations with good programming - 88.3 WRPS (Rockland's public radio station) and 101.3 WFNX (Scituate's community station - love that they picked up the WFNX callsign!) are pretty good, if you're in range.
Counterpoint: I always found WERS to be a slightly broader interpretation of adult contemporary programming than the commercial stations.
My goto was WUMB, which is out of UMass Boston, and played a consistent format (folk and Americana, I guess?) throughout the day. Blues Hangover on WHRB (Harvard) was always worthwhile when I caught it.
I worked at a startup that had _money_ - a lot of it - flowing in. Stakeholders wanted to see growth, which meant features. They did not want to see us making platform improvements; those didn't show well to clients. Best throw money at the problem, rather than sacrifice the all-important features.
We had a number of architectural quirks that reflected this. One was that we ran our databases in AWS on ephemeral instance store. Yes, the kind that doesn't persist when you stop or lose the instance. The kind that you should never run a database on. We did it so that we could join them eight of them together in RAID 0 on the biggest instance types, and pull 400,000 IOPS to the disk that way. We paired this with hot spares of each shard, as well as hourly backups.
We did this to support a Rails / ActiveRecord data model, for data that should never have been part of a Rails data model. We had exactly one person working part-time on query optimization.
The maintenance burden was immense. The AWS bill, even more so. But again, we are hypothesizing that we could host all of this data on a laptop.
To an extent, maybe up until our thousandth customer or so, I actually think we could have. But we wouldn't have spent most of our time working on _features_ - we'd have instead spent most of our time trying to performance optimize. That would've meant the investors wouldn't have seen growth, which in turn would've highly impacted our success. We had a well defined domain, and optimizing the queries for performance was not it.
What if there was someone involved who had built web applications than run on laptops before and made different architectural decisions than the path your company went down.
And what if they cost more than your entire AWS bill?
You seem to have misunderstanding on what scales some things run at, and expense curves of getting them to run at those levels.
A poorly built app running on hundreds of servers can be massively expensive. A well built app running on a single server can also be massively expensive because people that can build apps like that tend to command whatever price they want under the banner of server cost savings.
Can you build software this efficiently? If you can't, then being an armchair expert about it helps noone. If you can, you're undercharging your clients.
If my grandma had wheels she would have been a bike. Most of these decisions are made by someone very early on in the process, either a cofounder or an underpaid junior engineer, when the company has zero revenue and no PMF.
It's unrealistic to expect a startup to build a product (or at least it was prior to LLMs generating a lot of boilerplate) with best practices in place.
Morse code has some interesting properties that make it an ideal way to communicate when all else fails:
1. It can be transmitted by simple means through many mediums - radio waves (amateur radio, as in the article), light (turning a light on and off), sound (I once used a boat horn to communicate with another boat)... technically I could even tap it on someone's shoulder.
2. It's self-clocking; you don't need a way to synchronize between two operators. One of the amateur radio clubs within range of me, K1USN (https://www.k1usn.com/sst) runs a contest that's limited to 20wpm so that new operators can get used to interpreting Morse on the fly.
3. It's fairly easy to recover after a fault - much easier than, say, ASCII. I might lose a few characters, but much like a smudge on a written page, I can figure out where intelligible letters start again without much difficulty.
HAM was a nice rabbit hole to fall into, but unfortunately I couldn't muster enough interest to actually get good enough to go "on air".
Some other things that surprised me and may be interesting for other people:
Learning Morse code is like learning a new language. The unit of understanding is not dots and dashes but rather every letter is a unit that one (in modern training) learns to recognize intuitively as such before doing anything else.
On top of that, telegraphy has these three letter Q-Codes where one would assume that these abbreviations are for line efficiency, but also it's because three letters is a nice length that still decodes intuitively as a "word".
(Also Q was probably chosen because it so seldomly comes up in "normal" words, so it's like a little attention signal? But that is my speculation.)
One can see in conversation that these three-letter codes often only have to be transmitted once, whereas free text (e.g. proper names) are often sent with redundancy so it's easier to transcribe them as you have to fall back to decoding individual letters. (My ears still sometimes perk up suddenly when hearing Morse code from movies because suddenly I pick up something like CQ without even paying attention.)
People therefore use terms like "musicality" (at least in my language, not sure if that translates to English) to refer to the quality of one's transmission. There is a certain art to it.
One funny exception to the three letter codes that gets used in Germany. If somebody signs off for a lunch break, they'll key ESSEN (translates to "eating"/"food") which would be considered "too long" to decode intuitively but it has a nice drumroll to it so it still works :)
> Learning Morse code is like learning a new language.
It is not. Cat is still spelled cat.
I passed my 20 wpm morse code license 30+ years ago, and when I hear code to this day, it sounds just as natural as someone spelling cat as "See Aye Tee".
I just spent the past five years learning Morse code, and for me it was significantly more difficult than learning a foreign language. Perhaps I'm just getting old and my brain isn't as pliable as it used to be, but it's been a very long and difficult journey. Here is what I've learned:
- You can memorize the letters and decode up to around 20 WPM. But this is using the low-bandwidth, logical part of the brain which simply isn't capable of decoding much beyond 20 WPM.
- To go beyond 20WPM you have to hand-off the processing to the subconscious mind. This is the phase that's equivalent to learning a new language. It requires a tremendous amount of repetition to build the mental muscle memory to hear the letters as a single sound instead of a series of beeps. It literally took years of daily practice to get there.
- Once you've mastered the individual letters you eventually start hearing combinations of letters as unique sounds. And at some point, you start to hear entire words, not letters.
- If I attempt to perceive individual letters at higher speeds I almost always end up missing the rest of the word. At these speeds, the conscious, logical brain becomes a liability that must be to be surpressed to decode effectively. As a 30 year software developer, this has been VERY difficult to do.
- When I get into the flow, I don't "think" about the letters or "hear" a series of beeps. The words somehow just magically pop into my mind.
I don't remember this much pain, but I was about 10 years old when I learned. On the other hand I've been learning guitar late in life and am wondering how much easier that would be if my brain had seen a few less orbits.
Morse code is not a new language, but it is a new way of writing, which is almost the same as a new language in many ways.
You get used to it, though. Your brain does the translating. I don't even see the code. All I see is blonde, brunette, redhead. Hey uh, you want a drink?
That isn’t what the person to whom you’re responding is saying.
Morse code is very much like a language in that there are audible intonations that differentiate between See, Aye and Tee. Being able to copy that in your head is the same as listening to English and not needing to reach for the dictionary every other word.
I learned Morse code almost 50 years ago. I distinctly remember how learning progressed through stages
- hear di-dah (sound), think dot-dash (printed symbols), in the table that's an A
- hear di-dah, think "A"
- hear dah, di-di-di-dit, dit, hear the word "the"
- add more and more words
Along with that progression, the mental buffer got bigger, as it has to in order for you to recognize whole words. If I was having a conversation near my speed limit, a good way to break me was to send a long unusual word
For what it's worth, Morse doesn't actually work via tapping (unless you add scraping as the dash component). Tapping makes no distinction between dots and dashes; what you intend as a dash is technically a dot and a pause.
I've told my family that if I'm ever in a hospital bed due and seemingly unresponsive due to injury or illness, to check whether I'm not trying to communicate (using eye movements, finger twitches, or whatever) in morse code.
Not sure if you're familiar with this or not, but that concept appears as part of the story in the novel[1] and movie[2] "Johnny Got His Gun". The premise is based on a badly injured soldier during WWI who has lost his ability to speak, see, hear, etc. He communicates by banging his head on his pillow in Morse Code. Many scenes from that movie are interspersed throughout the video to the song "One"[3] by Metallica.
I find driving to be one of the most useless ways of spending my time, and if it's for more than half an hour, I do try to figure out some way to increase the value of that time.
I have a weekly commitment that leaves me driving home (~40min) at 9pm, and I usually eat dinner (just a sandwich) while I drive. That also has the advantage of making it so that I'm not eating an hour before bed.
If I know that I need to call someone, I'll usually try to schedule that call while I'm driving. I used to take meetings while driving as well, though I stopped because it was perceived poorly by others.
What's sort of sad is that I can take public transit to all of my regular commitments, and that lets me keep doing something (reading, working, whatever). The schedules are poor, though, and they blow my commute times completely out of the water. For example, I've got a 5-7pm commitment that is a 15-minute drive one way, but if I wanted to go by bus, I'd have to leave at 3:30pm (latest it comes before I need to be there), and get back on it at 8pm (the earliest it comes after I'm done).
> take meetings while driving as well, though I stopped because it was perceived poorly by others.
The lack of self awareness here is astounding. You’re in control of a two ton bullet, please concentrate on the road. Killing somebody because you’re not paying full attention is not a good look.
I agree with you in regard to paying attention while driving, but the perception issue was actually around "you can't be bothered to be at your desk for meetings, so we perceive you as lazy", not "you're a risk to those around you, so we perceive you as irresponsible".
Why are you jumping to the worst possible interpretation? Who would you kill? America is full of long stretches of double digit hour drives through cornfields where you're not going to run into anything. At worse you'd hurt yourself. Obviously if you're in a city and there are people, even kids around, and you're not giving driving the attention it needs, you're an asshole. Fuck you. But how about not jumping to the conclusion that OP is an asshole?
It’s not useless though. It allows you to engage your default mode network, which is otherwise insanely suppressed in the barrage of constant stimulation that is modern life.
I agree with the author's premise - that one feedback loop optimizes for speed, and the other for scale - but I don't think the market is bearing the conclusion - that AI should be utilized to enable more rapid experimentation, where we better scale what works.
Many vendors seem to be learning (or not learning, but just throwing their weight against it anyway) that adding hastily-generated AI features are causing customer dissatisfaction, as more people brand the features "slop".
In the best case, the users give the company more chances. Infinitely more chances.
In a worse case, the users assume the new feature will always be bad, given their first impression. It's hard for a vendor to make people reconsider a first impression.
The absolute worst case is that AI enables a new market, but the first attempts are so poor that the first movers make people write that market off as a dead end, leading to a lost opportunity.
There was a point where two friends and I each lived alone in an apartment, and I was the only one who had a (2-door) car. We still occasionally did Costco runs.
We'd go in and walk the store - the whole store - aisle by aisle.
If I saw something like a 2-pound bag of tortellini, but thought two pounds was too big a quantity for me, I'd ask, "does anybody want to split two pounds or tortellini?" One might say yes, so we'd throw the tortellini in the shopping cart.
At the end, one person (the membership holder) would pay, and we'd divvy up the result of our haul into reusable containers, in the parking lot. One of us would then take point on itemizing the receipt, and we'd pay back the person with the membership.
In hindsight, I think we did this more to socialize than to save money, but we definitely did save money. Even as a single apartment-dweller, I bought my fair share of 24-packs of yogurt and 5-pound bags of frozen vegetables.
Growing up as a kid, we lived in the sticks and the small local grocery store had a limited produce section. My mom joined a little co-op where each person would put in the same amount of cash, but one person would make a trip to the downtown farmer's market. The purchase was split evenly between each member. Each trip a different person made the trip so the variety changed not only by what was available but by the person making the trip's preferences.
This was my introduction to collective buying and at the same time the fact there's a bigger world out there than where one lives.
This is what I did with 3 roommates in college. We saved a ton of money that way.
After college, I only had one roommate and Costco didn't work as well. The quantities for certain things are just a bit much. Buying 36 eggs for 4 adults made sense. Buying 36 eggs for 2 adults... not so much. I ended up going to Costco for toilet paper and gas, and that's it.
To this day, I'm still the "spouse" on one of those college roommates' costco memberships, LOL.
My experience has been that it's easy to say, "oh, it's just me", but much harder to subject someone you care about to the same standard that you would yourself. I'm in a similar position with the thermostat, even though something we initially bonded over was that we both kept our thermostats at a low temperature that was outside the window of being socially acceptable.
In the winter, I keep the thermostat at frigid temperatures when I am home alone and jack it up to warm just before any one else gets home. My thinking is that it is wasteful to warm up the entire house when it's just me since I can put on a sweater but I don't want to subject others to my, shall we say, quirks.
I keep meaning to calculate how much I am actually saving by freezing my butt off. My guess is it'll work out to something like $0.75 a day or something equally trivial.
Depending on the kind of heating system you have and the temperature differences you talk about it can be cheaper to heat the house to a constant temperature (because your heating can run more efficiently under lower load).
I once got a programmable thermostat and went through the trouble to set it up for the times we were normally at home and away, and my energy bills went up.
Now I just set a temperature that everyone can tolerate and I forget about it.
Correct, or the people doing this for environmental reasons... it's probably not better to do this. It would be better spending money on better insulation (assuming it isn't up to date).
It probably costs more to do that than to maintain a constant temperature. When you turn the setpoint down, everything inside your house and also your house itself starts losing heat. When you turn the setpoint back up, the cooled off house and items inside of it will suck up most of the heat until the stuff is warm again, and then the air warms up.
This is much more noticeable when you go into a freezing cold building and turn on the thermostat, it takes almost an entire day to heat up the stuff and building.
Thermodynamically, the heat lost to the outside is roughly linear with the temperature delta between inside and outside.
All else equal, setbacks do reduce energy lost to the outside; whether that saves money depends somewhat on the recovery strategy of your equipment; whether it’s desirable depends on your individual preferences.
I'm sort of curious where the law stands on this (I am not a lawyer).
Since it has a license plate on it, it in theory displays some ownership info. Is that enough for me to say, "it's clearly not mine now"? If it didn't, does that give me any right to take something off a public roadway?
Obviously, I know that the letter of the law, and what actually will be enforced, are two different things. Taking something that belongs to CBP would almost definitely be prosecuted in this case, regardless of whether it's legally fair game to do so.
It appears that I can't direct-link to it, but look up case 19S-CR-00528 on public.courts.in.gov - this was a case in which the Supreme Court of Indiana overturned an earlier ruling that removing a GPS monitoring device from your own car, when you weren't aware it was there, was theft.
I think its the same as stealing a bike or a car parked on the street. I don't know the subtleties but I don't think you can presume something is abandoned merely for being left on the street?
The ideal case is that a website gracefully degrades with JS disabled. That's largely a pipe dream with React usage being what it is, but some sites manage it. Github is one who still does this well.
The nonideal case is that I'm presented with a misrendered site, but I can still see some semantic information that may, or may not, be what I was looking for. Gitlab's an example of this.
The worst case comes where the site white-screens and doesn't load _anything_ of use. Reddit is an example where it loads nothing but a loading image. My worst pet peeve is the Stack Overflow-style failure mode, though, which explicit says: "Enable JavaScript and cookies to continue.", rather than making any attempt to show any content at all, which is most similar to what the author here is describing.