axelsvensson

A sibling and me constructed a con-lang, and we tried reverse polish order where you say the terms before the connectives.

It failed badly. While it's easy to construct sentences that way, it puts immense cognitive load on the receiver. Probably because you don't have any structure in which to put all these terms thrown at you, we reasoned, so we reversed the order to get structure (connectives) first, followed by the terms.

It wasn't better. Turns out, receiving a structure with a bunch of holes to be filled later also results in high cognitive load.

Why? My guess is that the cognitive load mainly comes from the number of unfinished structural connections. To minimize that, you need to transmit a tree in such a way that the terms come as close as possible to the connective. In other words, not bottom or top first, but "side first".

I believe this is why infix notation is so popular. While you parse "A and B" or "X + Y" you never have more than one open connection. When you parse "(+ X Y)" you have two open connections after reading the "+". Five levels deep that begins to matter a lot.

I like the purist lispy idea of operation-first expressions, but I struggle to make my mind actually work like that. If you like clojure-type threading macros, consider that they do something similar to infix notation: they reduce the number of open structural connections during parsing.

A tool to sign PDF files, with Linux support. We are here referring to the visible, non-cryptographic squiggles.

Someone who holds this view would probably have to make the definitions more precise, so that if you live in a deterministic reality, you actually cannot conceive of a universe that isn't deterministic. You can throw around words like "indeterministic", but you cannot precisely simulate something indeterministic using only deterministic ingredients, and hence, for some precise definition of "conceive", cannot conceive such a universe.

Author here. I chose tkinter because it's included in Python, or so I thought. I wanted to minimize the complexity of installation.

The README lists alternatives and why I find them insufficient. Okular allows free-hand annotations, but not saving those for later use. It allows inserting custom saved stamps, but these will not be visible in other PDF readers.

> We have so many online tools available to convert Volume units, but not every online tool gives an accurate result and that is why we have created this online Volume converter tool.

Then it converts 231 in^3 to 0.99999994293884 U.S. gal, while 1 U.S. gal converts to 231 in^3.

Backblaze is terrible, but you will likely only find out when you need to restore.

When backup excluded some files, they blamed antivirus software and recommended to go without.

They actively deleted their only backup because the client couldn't read the original files (which was due to disk error).

They admitted that there isn't any guarantee or even effort to make the backup consistent - after asking me to explain the concept.

The only reason I still have my data is because of the very expensive cleanroom disk rescue that they of course refused to pay for - because why try to do what you can to compensate for failing at your only job?

That's why I'd like to see a web archive doing this, so that most publicly accessible content gets a timestamp. That way, it would be suspicious to present an image of an event in the far past that should've been published long ago.

This can also be done anonymously for private files, as a feature of backup systems. That way, you could get the ability to prove to anyone that a certain piece of content was created before that timestamp. It would cost a minimal storage overhead, and the cost of time-stamping can actually decrease with more users.