aithoughts's comments

I agree.

People who don't understand need to know that big / Retina displays are not accessible to people who, let's say it, are poor immigrant geniuses who only have access to a 1024*768.

Terminals are 80x24, and even system administrators need to have multiple terminal windows open.

Let's not forget that a lot of people learn through books, so print real estate is an issue as well.

> Just because systems exist today that are bringing to your attention every single problem known to man doesn't mean you need to be involved in the solutions that are above your paygrade.

Ironically, these are the same systems that are causing the problem in the first place. You would put the last nail in the coffin of civic engagement?

At which paygrade am I allowed to cast my ballot? Voice my concerns? Is my own privacy "above my paygrade"?

That is odd indeed. I had the opposite experience a few years ago when I had a broken iPhone. I tried to give my account (iCloud) password but the clerk (Genius) stopped me and said "No, just the phone PIN so we can unlock it."

I would go with something outside the US. Like Mullvad (cheap + same-day email support) or / AirVPN (better UI, slightly more expensive). If you go on reddit.com/r/VPN you'll find detailed info on which ones have which features (jurisdiction, logging policy, etc.)

Setting your wake-up time isn't enough? I am new to Flux but unless they introduced this feature in the last 6 days, I don't understand your critique.

I disagree. This is an analysis piece. Its arguments are properly supported.

I disagree for a very simple reason: Screening is not being carried out properly.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/01/politics/tsa-failed-undercover...

I think we suffer from authority bias on this one.

Why is it rubbish? Would you please elaborate?

> this is clearly motivated by economical considerations more than security.

Can you elaborate?

Privacy is weighed against public safety all the time. The question is at which point does it become unreasonable. Warrantless searches of American individuals just so happens to be where we, as Americans, draw the line.

On the other hand, don't mistake my assault on the technical validity of your sentence for disagreement with its intent. We should be outraged.

Shame on us for having allowed this to happen, and for the dangerous precendent it sets for local monopolies to sell your information.

I'm surprised most people don't think like this.

I think that we have a cultural problem. People chose to take out loans for their tertiary education because of our beliefs in the tertiary educational system. College is to get a job, but we believe it's there for us to "discover ourselves." And that's how we end up with accountants.

Sometimes I wish there was some website where non-partisan smart people scientifically identified the current problems and come up with a finite, exhaustive list of possible problems. And then, determine the amount of money it would take to test a hypothesis. If they do and it fails, then they must take into account that hypothesis and correct for it.

How much money would need to be raised?

It's just too bad that I've never encountered anyone in real life that thinks like this. It feels so intuitive when you approach it like a computer problem.

I think the problem is that that political science is paradoxical in itself and goes against on of the most important tenets of science and reason: that we must give up our beliefs if the evidence proves them wrong.

Is there anyone out there who is balanced enough to actually be bipartisan? How would one search for such a unicorn? Is it really impossible?

As a percentage, how many US colleges would you say are excluded from the opportunities provided by "rigorous course of study"? Would you say you could get this kind of rigorous study at any university? If not, how many (as a percentage of all undergrad colleges)? Is this scalable/sustainable for the entire population?

Well, like you said, it really depends on what you'll be doing. Granted, there are different paths one's trajectory will take, and you won't know them in advance.

On the other hand though, I wouldn't presume to write my own cryptographic protocol without having the fundamentals myself. Wouldn't you say that it's actually reasonable to learn this on your own? There are so many options, paid, or free, that can help you with this. You could take a Coursera class, or follow an open source curriculum like someone said in the comments down below.

You did say "most individuals" struggle to learn in such a way, but the argument can be made that individuals studying cryptographic principles are not "most people", which, if not intelligence, shows a special kind of perseverence and dedication that will also differentiate them in self-study. I wouldn't say what you're saying is immediately obvious.

None. At least not on the first 9 months. Mostly it has been about performance, data structures, algorithms, and time complexities.

So far, the first part (9 months) the focus is mostly on practical project-based learning and skills for developers. But we are encouraged to learn on our own. I certainly know about uncountable sets and the Axiom of Choice, but how much do I really need for the problems I am solving on my day to day?

This may or may not scale but I've been lucky to be part of a startup program that roughly matches your description of a "better option". It's a 2-year program; I was, and still am, part of their experimental first class of students. So far I've gone through 9 months of entirely CS study, and I was even placed in an internship working in Mountain View, and without a college degree.

I have never held a dev job before, but I’ve gotten to doing some pretty serious and nuanced coding (all the way down to memory management and writing in C). They’re a really great team of people, their unofficial motto is “Google it”, and RTFM, and their program is called Holberton School.

I really hope it succeeds.

Interesting. Your use of `git commit -am` resounded with me. I can't stand doing `git add .` ; `git commit -m "message"`; `git push`. I aliased "commit" to "ci" in git-config, and then do `git ci -am "message" && git push`. I'm sure at some point I will add a hook to have the push done automatically (though sometimes I prefer to do it manually, so I will have to make a decision.)

I am an avid emacs user though. I really should check out vim.

Ironically, Germany is quite strong on privacy laws.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundesdatenschutzgesetz

> It follows that constant enforcement is contingent on constant supervision

I think I've found that it's neither necessary nor sufficient. Constant enforcement just means that you give the ticket no matter who you stopped.

Yes! In the book Rationality: From AI to Zombies[1], Eliezer Yudkowsky talks about this as the "availability" bias (Chapter 5.)

[1] https://intelligence.org/rationality-ai-zombies/

I think people like this were that way before they had kids.