Firstly, I thought sans-serif typefaces were encouraged for digital media because they read better than serif fonts. But now that high pixel density displays have permeated the market, this might be a moot point.
On another note, I wonder how much of the hate TNR gets stems from its ubiquity for having been installed on almost all personal computers for the past n decades.
Paganis are beautifully designed cars, but the labelling of buttons and toggles inside the center console look cheap (IMO) because their font seems straight out of a quickly made flyer designed by bored teacher who just discovered Word Art.
My understanding has always been that serif fonts read better for long text, and sans-serif for short text - so signage in Arial and policy statements in Times New Roman.
And Comic Sans for letters sent to friends finishing design school, obviously.
There are all sorts of statistical rules falling out of studies about where the long/short divide is, ambient lighting, blah blah blah - but human vision is even more variable than most biological quantities, so in the end general rules are the best one can really do.
Here of course, it's nothing more than rearranging the deck chairs, while the captain targets the next iceberg "to teach the ice a lesson!"
I want to read a study that compares what readers estimate for much effort was put into producing the same page of text in two contemporary and basic serif and sans-serif fonts. My hypothesis is that the serif font is viewed as more polished or refined, and therefore the result of more hours of work. But I could be wrong.
This is in-line with the advice here to use serif for long form and sans for short. When you're making signs and things like that, you don't have the repeated forms to inform your ability to interpret letters, so the serifs act to confuse readers, while in long form, they add flair, which could be more artistic and tasteful.
All the banks I have an account with here in India require SMS permission to use their apps, along with . The last straw was HDFC with their latest app revamp.
LOL in the name of security, HDFC is trying to move their OTP verification to be almost entirely app-only, (not open-source TOTP which can be generated by authenticator/any other auth app; you can only use HDFC's app for that even if you want to log in via desktop).
I think that’s pretty common worldwide. In Australia I’ve never encountered a bank or government service that allows any widely accepted secure 2FA. It’s always SMS or their own app. There used to be physical hardware tokens as well but they are going away.
I don't even care that much if they want to handle the 2FA with their proprietary methods. There are Android APIs that broker the OTP SMS delivery to the app without the app needing full access to the phone's messages.
If they can't do it on iPhone, they don't need to do it on Android.
If I recall, Watson was fed the whole text of the answer as soon as the other contestants could see it. Personally, I thought it would be fairer to have it do speech-to-text and/or OCR to level the playing field.
But I suppose these constraints are just targeting the machine's input mechanism and not its actual reasoning ability once the answer is read. I'm curious how Watson at the time could handle a particular category that Ken dominated: "Initials to Roman Numerals to Numbers" [1]
It would be cool if the Macbook can figure out the relative position of a newly connected external monitor. It would help in setting up the monitor with little manual adjustments.
Since covid, we no longer have assigned desks at work --- it's first come, first served. And while most are respectful of the desks we have "chosen" for ourselves, every once in a while, I'll have to sit at some other, often new desk. And that means my laptop will not recognize the monitor and that I'll have to configure it (scaling, relative position, etc).
And Windows being the mediocre OS that it is, will always select to duplicate the screens even though the logical choice is to extend. My laptop screen and the external monitor aren't even the same aspect ratio. SMH.
At least Macs have the sense to extend screens by default. Though, if I could place a Macbook on the desk, plug in the external monitor, tilt the screen back until the camera can see the monitor, the hinge sensor and cameras can work together to figure out where the monitor is relative to the laptop, and automatically determine the right settings for the monitor instead of requiring my intervention.
Yer that is likely a bad implementation of the automatic confirmation feature.
iOS and Android both make it possible to register a receiver for very specific SMS messages with additional permissions.
I remember hotmail before gmail. Attachments had a 2 MB limit. I couldn't even share HQ photos using hotmail. And the whole inbox had a 25 MB capacity. I do believe there were paid alternatives with more storage.
Gmail came in with 1 GB storage and grouping emails as conversations. To me, both of these aspects were revolutionary, and other email providers shortly followed suit.
* "other email providers shortly followed suit" means that it was never out of their reach to begin with, they just needed more competition to convince them to try: which didn't have to be Google and didn't have to be ad- or surveillance-supported.
* 1GB storage in 2004 to 15GB storage 21 years later suggests that something vital has stalled. Every other storage metric (price of RAM per MB, price of hard drives per MB, price of cloud storage per MB) has improved 100 fold over the same time period[1,2].
Which freemail service isn't ad- or surveillance-supported?
> suggests that something vital has stalled
Why does it have to be a technology-driven limit? I dare say Google thinks that anyone with more than 15GB of email is a serious enough user to pay for it.
> 1GB storage in 2004 to 15GB storage 21 years later
The original marketing was the the storage would grow forever, and you could believe it. Google was riding the an incredible high from smashing out what felt like constant Amazing New Things throughout the noughties. In fact, when they originally made the claim, back when Don't Be Evil was still the motto and they hadn't bought DoubleClick, I'm sure they believed it. By the time the final upgrade (or rather joining, of 5GB photos/Drive to 10GB mail) to 15GB came round in 2013, there was definitely a hint of the horns in the hairline.
It could also mean that you can't invest indefinite amount of storage to ever growing user base, if storage metrics would not improve indefinitely. There is a break down and 15GB cap is nothing comparing with Google Photos cut, which is a strong sign that storage is the problem even for behemoths.
Yes, and Gmail hasn't improved for decades. Why not? Because Google is a monopoly actor and does not need to compete.
Example: you can't create a new email label in the Android client. You have to log on to email in a browser and do it there. This was true when smartphones were a niche way of connecting to email, and it's still true today.
I would say that any function that implicitly favors a single number must be explicitly stated, and thus, if used for this game, be the number 2. So all uses of the radical must state which root (2). Dirac's solution then wouldn't work because the use of 2 is O(n).
Logs would also need to state the base. No implicit use of e or 10, and lg wouldn't be allowed in place of log2.
I haven't said much other than logs and roots are binary operators with one of the operands usually implicit in the notation, so if we don't have special notation for powers and exponentiation, then we shouldn't allow the same for their inverse operations.
Why is it ok to use "22" = 2 * 10^1 + 2 (when it could be a number in base 3 — 2 * 3^1 + 2 = 8 decimal — or any other base)? This implies base 10, just like root implies base 2, or ln means e.
As I said, this is a game, and trying to imply certain artificial constraints will be really hard with how abstract maths is.
Again, mention of successor function is apt: everything else is built from 1, succ() and another axiom, definition or so. So everything else can be reduced to this.
I said that this implicit use of 10 or some other number shouldn't be allowed. So log, ln, lg (i.e base 2) shouldn't be allowed, but log_b(x) where b and x are states is OK, just as 10^x, e^x, and 2^x require you to explicitly expose the base (and for this puzzle, disallow 10 and e since neither is a 2).
Successor is essentially s(n) = n + 1, so that shouldn't be allowed either.
FWIW, "successor" is not really n + 1: you've got that the other way around.
Successor simply "is" (it's a relation that satisfies a number of conditions), and summation is defined in terms of successor function.
My point is that you can really define everything in terms of these primitive definitions, which means that there won't be any single use of a non-2 digit for any function, or you'll be going with a set of arbitrary allowances.
But the whole point should be: what are those arbitrary constraints that make the game fun? And once you clear that bar, it's ok to open up the next one (this does not make them non-arbitrary though).
Basically, I am saying your take at those arbitrary decisions is not a very fun one ;-)
I didn't say it was. Browsers display an alert when full-screen mode is activated. Full-screen mode isn't a security feature, but the browser does something the website developer can't control so that users can conclude that something fishy isn't going on. I think the ability for one website to hide that they've redirected to another is a vulnerability.
I'm inclined to agree that websites should know when they're the target of a redirect but that has nothing to do with Referer! That header does not work the way so many seem to think it does. As I've laid out elsewhere in this thread, HTTP redirects do not show up in Referer under any circumstances. Right now, one site doesn't have to do anything to "hide" that it's part of a redirect chain, since there's no tracking of that chain to begin with.
Hypothetically, but parties are also incredibly weak right now.
In California, we run an Open Primary system for every partisan office outside the POTUS so parties can’t even guarantee they’ll get a candidate into the general election even if they are otherwise eligible to put nominees forward and sometimes it’s Democrat vs Democrat (this has been happening for US Senate elections) or in some legislative districts Republican vs Republican.
Then coming from the opposite direction, you had a complete outsider in Trump effectively takeover the Republican Party in 2016 and he’s still holding the reins in 2024. Bernie Sanders almost managed something similar with the Democratic Party and they just barely held strong enough to keep that from happening. Twice.
Frankly political parties are incredibly unlikely to come together to impose any restrictions that would impose any kind of extra burden on their elder members, let alone age-gate them.
I missed the part where you explain how Bernie Sanders is a meaningful analog to Donald Trump, such that his primary defeats should be hailed as “holding strong” against an insurgent candidate?
Well the unknown variable is whether like Trump he would prove to be more popular than the party he ran under after a successful Presidential election effectively taking it over so you got me there; but they were in 2016 both outsiders who came into their parties to run for President under an already successful Party-brand and made a helluva run, one more successfully than the other.
Either way, neither of them should have gotten as far as they did.
How about the login service send the code encrypted in the SMS such that it can only be decrypted on the phone of the actual user? Still vulnerable to phishing attempts, but better than relying on deficiencies of SMS technology .
Firstly, I thought sans-serif typefaces were encouraged for digital media because they read better than serif fonts. But now that high pixel density displays have permeated the market, this might be a moot point.
On another note, I wonder how much of the hate TNR gets stems from its ubiquity for having been installed on almost all personal computers for the past n decades.
Paganis are beautifully designed cars, but the labelling of buttons and toggles inside the center console look cheap (IMO) because their font seems straight out of a quickly made flyer designed by bored teacher who just discovered Word Art.