ctbeiser

I could not have invented it. I was one year old.

It seems pretty clear in the OP that headline is misleading—they do work, just not as well as he would like. I think that a 50% cut in light emission is pretty good—and you can stack that with the other interventions listed, like auto-dark mode and reducing light in your room.

I have a guess as to why this fix was delayed—on the release candidate, you weren't able to resize windows in Stickies. I filed a bug for it. This felt like a last-minute addition—the previous betas didn't have the 'fix.'

Let's think about why: if the width of the handle is based on the radius, and the radius is 0 for a window, there's nowhere for the grab handle to be.

I assume this wasn't the only app with fully square windows, and so the fix actually caused more problems. Respinning a release candidate is expensive, and they were out of time for this one. So the patch gets reverted and the fix gets iterated on for the next release, where they'll presumably figure something clean out that's conditional on exact window shape.

26.4 could be the spring hardware release or it could be the spring services release. I would give it a 2/3 chance of landing in 26.4, and a 1/3 of being moved to 26.5.

The other banks involved all agree that the remaining balances are with Evolve, and that there isn't money that's been moved somewhere else. If there was, Evolve might be willing to say where, which they've been unwilling to do so far–it's very "dog ate my homework."

Given that the depositors still have active DDA agreements with Evolve, even if they sent the money elsewhere, they still have a responsibility to provide it.

The accounts were genuinely FDIC insured. Evolve is a real bank.

But a few months before the bankruptcy, Evolve pushed Synapse to move the money into non-FDIC insured brokerage accounts. As far as I can tell, this was:

- a way to move a hole in the balance sheet from an FDIC insured to an uninsured place

- completely illegal, insofar as the only user consent was a manual opt-out, and some users weren't even sent emails about the change.

Feedbin for sync and for email ingest. A key fact about this is that unlike Feedly and Newsblur, it keeps old content indefinitely. That means that if I don't check feeds for a while, or something is too heavy to read one month, I don't lose it forever.

iOS: Unread, which is just supremely beautiful. I'm amazed that the "double tap to mark read/unread" interaction isn't standard.

Mac: Reeder, which is nice and flexible though not perfect.

iFixit is charging $39 for an iPhone mini battery, or $25 for an iPhone SE battery. Paying $25-30 for half an hour of labor—on a $400-1200 device—every two years sounds… totally fine to me?

I suspect that of all the things burning the world, it's mostly oil and cars. iPhones are unusually useful, but they're not unusually resource intensive.

You might look at Sparkleshare; it's not P2P, but it is open source, self-hosted and encrypted.

This doesn't prove that economics is wrong. It just proves that something like one of every two economists is wrong. This is not a hard problem to figure out the answer to by looking at historic data either. Read both sides closely, and if you're paying enough attention, you'll figure out which one is right pretty fast.

There are also plenty of people who are interested in people of two or more genders that you shouldn't erase. This is the kind of thing where, if you really can't figure out how to make it work with your current design, you seriously need to go back to the drawing board.

The problem with modes is fundamentally that people make mode-errors; they're not sure what mode they're in. If you've got users who aren't looking at the device, then yes, they'll make mode errors, because they have no clue what they're doing. If it's an unambiguous mode, and people understand the ways into and out of the mode, sure, you've got no problem, but those conditions are typically only met by system-level conventions.

I think the point is being missed here, to some degree. This is not necessarily the best way to live. But it's worth considering: what would you do if you weren't tied to a corporation for 8 hours a day in order to feed and house your family? My immediate instinct is not quite "Let's commute for an hour a day and grind out code for some project I don't really care about." Your life may vary, but while he's at an extreme, it sounds like one that's less sucky than that.

If you took statistics in college, you might recall that correlation does not imply causation. There's a hidden third set of factors here; your intelligence, wealth, etc. That people who go to college make more does not mean that college means you make more. The way I see it, those with higher future earning potential more frequently decide to go to college.

"As the deflationary feedback amplifies the desire to hoard, the exchanges will become illiquid."

The rest of it makes perfect sense, but why would we think this, rather than that market forces will drive prices up, and people will sell as a result, fulfilling demand?