unlaxedneurotic

Say there are two people with same understanding of a nuanced argument. One fails to articulate that argument in a written form such that the reader is able to understand it. The other is successful in doing that. I'll say the second person is a better writer. No marketing involved.

It's the same for Android.

To align the cutout with Waldo, you need to know where he is. Since the entire picture would be hidden behind the mask, the other person won't know where in the picture that location is, but by aligning the mask cutout you can prove _your_ knowledge about Waldo's location.

How often would this kind of report writing, which may involve many reporters, happen in an org like that? I don't think someone would like to invest in training and tooling for something that might happen once a year.

I think it might be due to the compunding factor of multiple people working on multiple files concurrently. Collaboration in research is more limited to sharing information, and when writing does take place at the same time it is only usually a couple people working on it. The frequency of sharing files could also be a factor. Also I don't think anyone wants to learn to use another piece of software among the dozen they already have to use. Emailing a latex file at the end of the day seems much simpler.

Probably when my <50yo dad stops asking me to change the font size on his phone everytime he changes it. The thing is, technology is just a tool for most people and except software engineers almost no one wants to spend any time dealing with anything that they would have to configure. Until the day linux based OSes come pre-installed with sane defaults that work out of box on laptops, the average person won't use it.

I too disabled the default "Recommended by Twitter" feed and instead chose to view only tweets by accounts I follow in a chronological order. Absolutely no political stuff. This resulted in a very pleasant twitter experience.

>>“does it reduce to Newton’s Laws under non-extreme conditions” Thomas Kuhn said something about this in his Structures of Scientific Revolutions.

<i>Imagine a set of statements, E1, E2, . . . En , which together embody the laws of relativity theory., ..... This enlarged set of statements is then manipulated to yield a new set, N1 , N2 , . . . , Nm , which is identical in form with Newton’s laws of motion, the law of gravity, and so on. </i>

<i>Yet the derivation is spurious, at least to this point. Though the N1’s are a special case of the laws of relativistic mechanics, they are not Newton’s Laws. Or at least they are not unless those laws are reinterpreted in a way that would have been impossible until after Einstein’s work. The variables and parameters that in the Einsteinian E1’s represented spatial position, time, mass, etc., still occur in the N1’s; and they there still represent Einsteinian space, time, and mass. But the physical referents of these Einsteinian concepts are by no means identical with those of the Newtonian concepts that bear the same name.</i>

I don't think so. As I understand it, gravity and acceleration are equivalent, if you aren't experiencing any acceleration then time dilation won't occur. (Assuming we are not traveling near the speed of light)

I believe that OP is talking about estimating deadlines for yourself. If you estimate a deadline and then due to some reasons your mental state deteriorates, that makes it considerably harder to achieve it. Sales targets and deadlines provided externally would have very different connotations imo.

The photon paths bend due to the curvature of space-time caused by gravity. This does not mean that they have non-zero mass. iirc, it has been proved that photons have non-zero _momentum_ but I am not sure about mass.

Even media can be described in a similar fashion, a lot of them promote content that generates the most clicks - which is often biased and polarising. There are sides to every discussion. I am no fan of google's data collection policies, but at the same time cannot refute the value they have created as a company.

But do we have a responsibility to not hinder someone else's free speech? Not with regards to the current post but just thinking in lines with what you said.