Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | netik's comments login

fantastic! I’ve been building game show buzzers and various PCBs for them for about ten years and used them at a lot of events.

any chance you’ll open source this?

My boards and code live here:

https://github.com/netik/rpi_gameshow


Articles like these which blame technology as the great evil, with a “what about the children! think of the children!” bent, are biased and troubling.

The article starts by blaming then iPhone and social media and goes on to show how the child is a victim of poor parenting and divorce.

Maybe the child’s depression, anxiety, and longing for acceptance comes straight out of the broken home and not social media.


Why do you find it troubling? The article doesn't claim that poor parenting and divorce doesn't have negative effects on a child. It claims that social media, amplified by technology, has had negative effects on his/her child. Technology is a double edged sword and good parenting is supposed to shield predatory action by social media companies.

I think this quotation captures the sentiment the best: "She assessed her worth within a system where she was simultaneously attention-addicted and attention-starved. She’d internalized an algorithm where provocative content wins"


Note: netik’s bio indicates they used to work at Twitter.


that'll do it. Thanks william


The kid's mental health improved when she gave up her phone. So there is that and also some research that justifies the causation [1].

[1] https://jonathanhaidt.substack.com/p/social-media-mental-ill...


It is a valid question to ask. Natural response would be to test whether rates of depression, anxiety and lack of belonging were reported lower or higher for previous cohorts.

My take is less nuanced, because I already see some addiction in my kid to screens ( I would blame my wife, but I am to blame as well ), which prompted me to crack down on it. I think there is a lot of blame to share, but I don't think parents are more to blame than a corporation with nation-state level of resources to overcome objections, force trends and so on.


Unlike social media/smartphone usage, divorce rates don't suddenly spike in 2010 to match the spike in childhood mental health problems. Despite social media companies best efforts, there is no reasonable alternative hypothesis for what happened globally in 2010 to cause the problem.


There are lies, damned lies, and statistics: https://www.techdirt.com/2022/07/21/blaming-social-media-for...


Maybe. But according to the author, she’s doing better without the phone.

From what I remember of middle school, having constant 24/7 contact with my classmates would have been detrimental, so I buy it.


That was exactly my impression


it’s batshit insane reading an article about privacy and surveillance while a request for tracking cookies sits at the bottom of the screen


The gold standard for this Druid at very large scale, or ClickhouseDB. Clickhouse has a lot of problems as far as modifying/scaling shards after the fact, while Druid handles this with ease (and the penalty of not being able to update after the fact.)


Doris?


back in my day we did this with discrete TTL or CMOS shift registers and no PICs. they are a luxury ;)


74374?


advertisement pretending to be helpful.


Authy makes the user enter this on a periodic basis to refresh their memory, which is a good thing imho


I’ve always referred to biometrics as a “non revokable username” and not a “password.”

100% agree with you here.


and of course, it’s ugly. sigh.

Why is it that every OSS desktop has to look like a demo from the 70’s?


The desktop and UI conventions are largely inspired from NeXTstep, which is from the late 1980s and was considered ahead of its time. However, there is nothing preventing the use of alternative designs. One example is the Etolie project from the late 2000s and early 2010s, which used the GNUstep API but didn't rely on NeXT-style UI conventions:

http://etoileos.com/etoile/

If GNUstep gains traction, there will almost certainly be a project to create a modern desktop. I personally like the NeXTSTEP UI, but I wouldn't mind something new.


> If GNUstep gains traction, there will almost certainly be a project to create a modern desktop.

I think that's backwards. They need to create a project for a modern desktop to gain traction.


> Why is it that every OSS desktop has to look like a demo from the 70’s?

You need some unixporn[0] in your life.

Also people have different tastes and preferences and like the NeXTStep or Win95 or OS/2 or BeOS or Classic Mac or whatever look.

[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/unixporn/


I find it much more appealing than any of the modern "flat" UIs. GNUstep's prototype NeXTSTEP popularized this grey 3D look in the early 90s.


> it’s ugly. sigh.¶ Why is it that

Because you haven't sent the patches that would make it prettier (e.g. ones that would make it as pretty as, say, Mac OS).


Probably because they would have been rejected.


Some people like the ugly retro look. You can make KDE look slick and modern if you want, but some people want to make it look like Windows 95.


every few years i go and search for a NeXTStep theme for gnome or kde. (i also look at GNUstep but switching the whole desktop environment is more effort, since the needed packages are not easily available, and the apps i use do not have GNUstep alternatives either, so i am struggling a bit not knowing how to proceed)


Have you looked at modern Gnome or KDE Plasma? They are both at least as petty as MacOS or Windows.


KDE Plasma is great and actually seems to have inspired a bunch of Win11 approaches, so it is possible to get things looking good but there's definitely truth in the sentiment above: a huge chunk of OSS software looking terrible.

There's always the form vs function debate but it's a shame that more doesn't manage to have both form and function if the respective specialists could coordinate


> They are both at least as petty as MacOS or Windows

Yeah, no. I don't think you use macOS/win at all if you say stuff like that. It feels and always has felt rough around the edges.


Modern KDE is actually more polished than MacOS in specific areas, like allowing a single window to span across multiple monitors in a seamless manner


Less polished in some areas too, though. It's slowly improving over time but for example fine UI/UX details like whitespace usage, control alignment/placement, and typography have always felt a bit… "off" in KDE as well in most software written with Qt, which I think probably boils down to Qt being more likely to be chosen by devs who are more technically inclined than design or UX inclined.

In my opinion GNOME and GTK apps generally get those details more "correct", though GNOME 3 and up goes way overboard on padding. Strip that padding down with a theme and its design is solid though, and Cinnamon, XFCE, and MATE get these right out of the box with no modifications necessary.


But that's why these "X has a better UI than Y" arguments are silly. I prefer KDE to any other DE because it worked (I now use MacOS and can't run other DEs) for me, and most people who prefer other DEs. That's OK. They all have different strengths and weaknesses (customization, resource usage, ability to run on certain OSes, high DPI support, etc).


i still use MacOS and windows from time to time, and i simply have to disagree. using MacOS has just as many WTF moments as i get with Gnome (and KDE too i think, but i haven't used that in a while) a windows just leaves me baffled every time i have to touch it. ( https://commadot.com/wtf-per-minute/ )


The one thing I think is great in Windows is the whatever the active apps bar at the bottom is (taskbar?). Hover, get thumbnails, etc. On mac, I find it kind of painful to juggle a few windows of the same application. Can say the same in Linux as well, some apps don't even show up at all, even though they're running in a window/viewport.

I genuinely like and dislike most OS UIs I've tried. They all have things that irk me. While windows settings has gotten more consistent, it's also all the more painful when you had gotten used to the "old way" of doing things and where to look. If MS executives could just get TF out of their own way on some of the stupidity and force-feeding.

Mac, just feels a bit dated at this point, but the touchpad integration across all apps is great. Not to mention the macbook touchpads being second to none in terms of usability.

Linux, I can shift to almost exactly what I want. There are rough edges and spots you cannot reach via UI, but it mostly works without issue. Been using Budgie as my DE for over a year, fairly customized and like it a lot.


Not defending macOS here, but switching between windows and managing them is usually performed via Exposé, (ctrl-uparrow)


Also, if you’re at the command-tab picker, the up arrow key will switch to windows of the currently selected app (and left/right arrows will change the currently selected app). The macOS command-tab switcher has a bunch of functionality built in.


Thanks, That's a hotkey I wasn't aware of... I know I could use gestures (three finger swipe up), but usually using my mouse.


discovery of hotkeys can be a challenge. despite having used gnome for years now i only recently learned that i can switch windows with alt-esc instead of alt-tab, which is much faster when you have multiple windows of the same app or want to switch back and forth between to windows. and i only found this while searching for an extension that would make switching windows easier.


Unity used to show the keyboard shortcuts when you held the Super key:

https://i.stack.imgur.com/JDDku.png

To my knowledge, modern GNOME does not have this which is sad. There's this webpage instead:

https://help.gnome.org/users/gnome-help/stable/shell-keyboar...


the thing is that i would not even have thought of looking there. i was at "switching windows is a pain, how can i make it better" which is not "is there a hotkey to switch windows differently, because why would i even consider that there are multiple ways to switch windows, especially with gnome that kind of has a reputation of removing seemingly unneeded features.


It does have that reputation but I've found it very usable.

"Half-maximizing" windows with Super+Left and Super+Right is very handy when I need to see things side-by-side.

Moving windows from one screen to another by pressing Super and doing drag-and-drop, and moving windows across workspaces with Shift+Super+PgUp and Shift+Super+PgDown are also convenient.


oh, no doubt. i am still using it too. the reputation in this case was just misleading me. i simply need to research and learn more of these shortcuts


I use both and I think KDE looks and feels great.


I understand "petty" is a typo, but I kind of agree with that meaning too.


It would be great if Xerox PARC UI was already that advanced in the 70's, or UNIX's twm.


Call me cantankerous but I'd rather UI paradigms were frozen in this era. And it's 90s, not 70s ;)


I recommend a brief read on GNUStep before looking at a picture and going “blah ugly, bad!”


Also, some GUI on Mastodon showed how OSX would look without Aqua by patching some libraries, and it show up the same literal ugly interface from GNUStep/NextSTep. Literally the same, with the grey rectangles.



Yes, that. Thanks.


You could see the transition in OSX developer previews. Some apps would retain the old look, or icons.


I prefer the looks of Gnome over MacOS, particularly the text.


OSX it's as ugly as GNUStep/NeXTStep. Search for the Mastodon post on patching OSX to disable Aqua on MAC OS X < 10.5, and you'll see how they kept the exact same NeXTStep/GNUStep widgets. I am not trolling, Google/DDG it.


apart from calling it ugly i can confirm that. early OSX was 100% NeXTStep with a changed style. i loved it. MacOS now is really very much a modernized version of that.


This could not be found on either google or ddg. Link?



Next time please provide a link.


You can see it in the thread now, and I was in a hurry, sorry.


Because developers are not graphic designers.


absolutely wrong approach. fix this at the carrier level and not client device level.


I think you might be right here, but what does that look like exactly? Stop companies distributing cheap SIMs? Force them to get ID from any customer?


Maybe a standarized national system to report spam, or maybe even as part of the cellular protocol? I never heard of such a system deployed nationally, but I'm wondering if it could help.

Most of the time when a spam number calls me, I can find it through spam reports on 3rd party websites by googling it.


> Most of the time when a spam number calls me, I can find it through spam reports on 3rd party websites by googling it.

Oh, you mean that you can identify the Caller ID number which the spammer chose to spoof at you?


No, it seems most spammers here use cheap SIMs without spoofing (which seems to be what OP is about). They even leave voicemail messages asking to call back.

But spoofing is also something that should be fixed. I know it's difficult because of VoIP and backwards-compatibility, but it's not impossible either.


> Maybe a standarized national system to report spam, or maybe even as part of the cellular protocol?

Not government, but, forwarding spam texts to 7726 (SPAM) works for various carriers.


You're forgetting that 1) carriers have near-zero engineering capability to fix this and 2) don't actually have an incentive to prevent spam/fraud because fraudulent traffic still pays them money.

This is not about stopping fraud, this is about preventing "grey routes" that do arbitrage around tariffs and bypass carriers' outdated business model.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: