bonoetmalo's comments

I read this as Nvidia shares resumé fail. I sometimes think headline writers treat confusing headlines as an artform

ngl that's pretty funny, never knew that. I am in the camp of wishing more apps could run in the background (long-running downloads/uploads for Spotify or Google Photos) but I appreciate that it's a dangerous road to go down

I didn't get the impression they were targeting TikTok as a platform, that's just where this happens to be occurring (statistically so, given the popularity of TikTok). I definitely got the impression the author was focusing on the technology itself, and how trivially accessible it is. PimEyes is actually less accessible than facecheck.id because PimEyes doesnt index social media and has a strong paywall. facecheck.id does not have those guards.

Edit: They were targeting TikTok somewhat in the platform's refusal to moderate this type of content, which I think is a fair criticism and known to be somewhat unique to TikTok. (None of the platforms have perfect moderation but TikTok's is notoriously inconsistent and robotic)

I presume it's using sites like facecheck.id which have an index on all social media, and provide a reverse face search into that index. This means even people who change their FB name to something random, for privacy reasons, can be found. So no, I'd say the victims are not doxxing themselves.

Texas, one of the most obnoxiously anti-fed states, requires annual inspections.

I acknowledge this is the prerequisite a lot of people need to justify queer peoples' existence.

> wouldn't you want their existence to be justified

In my ideal world, I would want my existence to be justified even if I 100% chose to be bisexual, gay, trans, etc. So yes, I do want it to be justified, but I don't want genetics to be the justification.

Kind of hopeful we can stop using genetics as a way of justifying queer peoples' existence. Whether it's conditioning, a choice, or genetics, shouldn't really be a factor in how you treat queer people.

I think maybe a better question/support would be evidence that anybody besides corporate diversity teams have said this is a problem.

To be clear- I also think the terms are problematic and my company is also pushing for it. But I think it's worth asking whether we're speaking over actual black people. It does give off pretty heavy white guilt vibes.

Edit: I think a good example of this is the fact that my company is pushing for this change but still doesn't have a single black person at the VP+ levels. It's pandering, and distracting from the core problem.

NXG is better from a development environment perspective, but the diagram driven workflow is the same

I believe this has been a known issue for years now.

Lmao, thanks for making me laugh at work.

Does Sourcegraph not already have this feature? Do they plan to?

Relying on opacity for state is generally bad for accessibility

Slider handle doesn't work on Chrome Android 66.0

I think it's less a LoC thing than it is a number of symbols/files thing. We have some 900k+ tests with an accompanying large number of test asset files. That means 900k public methods that test discovery has to process in realtime.

It's partially on us to move away from the antipattern of solution monoliths, and to nugetize crap that doesn't need to actually be in the solution. But it's also on Microsoft to lazily load projects that aren't being used.

You'll find a much different experience with OOM exceptions for developers working on large solutions, especially ones that contain a lot of test projects and small test assets. They've improved on it in 2017 but it's still pretty bad, OOM full crashes multiple times a day.

I get the impression that the author of the article hasn't used a debugging feature any more advanced than breakpoints before. I don't want to stick up for Visual Studio because it has so many issues, but it's an incredibly powerful debugging tool with tight source control integration, and isn't going away any time soon. Visual Studio Code just doesn't provide the toolset needed by a team of 500 developers working on a monolithic software project, and it shouldn't, that isn't what it's intended to be. It's good at what it is already.

I gave up ReSharper in 2015. It's a great tool and I miss it, but our solution has nearly doubled in size over the past few years and even vanilla VS 2017 struggles with it. We have dev ops working on nugetizing some of the bloat and Microsoft premier support is helping us to understand why our solution is so stressful on Visual Studio.

The in process limitation is a real killer for ReSharper.

Could somebody point me to a technical explanation of why it's sometimes non trivial to just compile your app against x86-64 and call it a day?

For example, something I encounter every day is Visual Studio and it's helper processes being 32 bit. Because Visual Studio regularly, even on the latest 15.7 preview shits the bed with OutOfMemoryExceptions on our large solution, I'm inclined to rage "why don't they just make it 64 bit? If it could just load more into memory it could get past this indexing hurdle and give me back the UI". But I also understand that if it was that simple they would have done it by now.

Something else, that I understand more, is the LabVIEW RT and FPGA modules only working on 32 bit LabVIEW. I would assume it's related to the compiling and deploying to the 32 bit ARM/x86 RT target.

Gnome has always worked pretty well with High DPI. But yes Linux display managers are generally pretty bad, as I learned with my 1440p 13 inch laptop as recently as 2015.