Social smartphone games
Mar. 16th, 2016 04:29 pmLiv and I have been playing remote scrabble again a bit (if anyone else is interested, we're using Crosswords by Eric House), and I replied to a couple of drawings on Draw Something from a while back.
Are there other social games people play? I really liked about Draw Something (a) that it bounces back and forth with someone else and (b) each move is self-contained. I've tried to play board games on Yucata which is great, but once I've made a move, I find it really hard to do something else and not keep thinking about the game.
Are there other social games people play? I really liked about Draw Something (a) that it bounces back and forth with someone else and (b) each move is self-contained. I've tried to play board games on Yucata which is great, but once I've made a move, I find it really hard to do something else and not keep thinking about the game.
http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/30152/did-saddam-hussein-have-a-quran-written-in-blood
This obviously sounds completely made up, but was reported straightforwardly in a bunch of mainstream articles. I couldn't figure out what those articles were based on though, and I couldn't find any earlier references, nor any mention on Snopes, so I don't know how to tell. Other than "I refuse to think about it, it's just obviously true/false", does anyone know where to go from there?
This obviously sounds completely made up, but was reported straightforwardly in a bunch of mainstream articles. I couldn't figure out what those articles were based on though, and I couldn't find any earlier references, nor any mention on Snopes, so I don't know how to tell. Other than "I refuse to think about it, it's just obviously true/false", does anyone know where to go from there?
Thanks to everyone who suggested using moisturising cream over winter, it really helped avoid cracking on my hands! Is there any benefit to using it over summer if I don't see any immediate problem?
More december prompts
Dec. 2nd, 2014 10:43 amSee: http://cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com/912810.html
I still have up to a dozen spare slots for december days, other prompts would be welcomed, perhaps including:
* Maths
* coding/software/web design/best practices/programming languages/etc
* religion/spirituality/philosophy
* Something where the answer might be interesting, but is easy to ask and answer, for days when I don't have time to write a long essay
* Something you might ask someone else but wouldn't normally think to ask me
Don't worry if there's slightly too many, I'll pick some and come back to some later if I like. Thank you! Also, go fill in everyone else's december memes too :)
I still have up to a dozen spare slots for december days, other prompts would be welcomed, perhaps including:
* Maths
* coding/software/web design/best practices/programming languages/etc
* religion/spirituality/philosophy
* Something where the answer might be interesting, but is easy to ask and answer, for days when I don't have time to write a long essay
* Something you might ask someone else but wouldn't normally think to ask me
Don't worry if there's slightly too many, I'll pick some and come back to some later if I like. Thank you! Also, go fill in everyone else's december memes too :)
One of the very minor DIY bits we said we'd do is replace some of the shelves in the sliding wardrobe with a hanging rail for clothes. I think that's really simple but I've not done even that much before.
As best as I can tell, the wood shelves are simply screwed to the wood supports and could be unscrewed and lifted off. And the rail could rest on the top support (or would it be better to get one of the rail-ends which screws into the wood at the side? But then it has to fit to the mm?)
So that means, just get a metal tube 91 cm long. Is that about right? Am I missing any obvious problems?
If so, what's the easiest way for that -- to go to homebase? Or would Mackay's be nicer? Or easier to order online?
As best as I can tell, the wood shelves are simply screwed to the wood supports and could be unscrewed and lifted off. And the rail could rest on the top support (or would it be better to get one of the rail-ends which screws into the wood at the side? But then it has to fit to the mm?)
So that means, just get a metal tube 91 cm long. Is that about right? Am I missing any obvious problems?
If so, what's the easiest way for that -- to go to homebase? Or would Mackay's be nicer? Or easier to order online?
December Days
Nov. 17th, 2014 11:35 pmGive me a prompt you'd like to hear me talk about for a day in December! It can be one word, or a detailed question, or anywhere between. Feel free to suggest several and I'll pick some or all of them. You can suggest a particular day if you like, but by default I'll spread them out at random through December. People who know me well and people who are mostly lurking both encouraged to say something.
Thank you!
( Read more... )
Thank you!
( Read more... )
Android Update 4.4.3
Nov. 10th, 2014 05:06 pmMy nexus has repeatedly downloaded android system update 4.4.3, but when trying to install it, stopped with a cute picture of a fallen-over robot with an "Error!" triangle coming out of its chest. I've turned it off and on again several times, but don't know what else to try.
I don't think I rooted it, unless I did and didn't do anything with it and completely forgot.
Is it indicative of a hardware problem? Or a virus??
Conversely, the internet seems to have a lot of people saying "don't install 4.4.3". Is that safe? Should I just ignore the problem?
I don't think I rooted it, unless I did and didn't do anything with it and completely forgot.
Is it indicative of a hardware problem? Or a virus??
Conversely, the internet seems to have a lot of people saying "don't install 4.4.3". Is that safe? Should I just ignore the problem?
Exercise room
Oct. 27th, 2014 08:45 amAt the gym, I mostly do the same things, a run on the treadmill (or occasionally another machine) and a few weights. And the habit is sufficiently established I'd maybe like to quit the gym and do it elsewhere.
In summer, I can run outside easily, and am looking to do more social running (parkrun, hashing, etc). However, in winter it's much less attractive to run outside, and I think I can, but I'd maybe like the option of doing exercise indoors, so (a) there's no hurdle of "do I really want to go out in this" (b) ideally, so I can watch DVDs at the same time, combining the two things I never have time for :)
The practical question is, if I wanted to do exercise in the TV room, what should I use? I know there are home treadmill/elliptical/rowing machines, but I don't know how good they are. Are there ones that are at least a little space efficient? Contrariwise, it seems like step aerobics (or maybe just skipping?) might be equally efficient -- is that actually plausible, or not really?
In summer, I can run outside easily, and am looking to do more social running (parkrun, hashing, etc). However, in winter it's much less attractive to run outside, and I think I can, but I'd maybe like the option of doing exercise indoors, so (a) there's no hurdle of "do I really want to go out in this" (b) ideally, so I can watch DVDs at the same time, combining the two things I never have time for :)
The practical question is, if I wanted to do exercise in the TV room, what should I use? I know there are home treadmill/elliptical/rowing machines, but I don't know how good they are. Are there ones that are at least a little space efficient? Contrariwise, it seems like step aerobics (or maybe just skipping?) might be equally efficient -- is that actually plausible, or not really?
Missing Box
Sep. 29th, 2014 07:25 pmAfter we moved we were pretty good at unpacking, but we seem to have a few small things missing. So far, our small plates, our bowls, grandma's mortar, and maybe a few other small kitchen things.
It's probably most efficient to write those off, as the total cost is tiny compared to the total cost of the move. But I'm worried there's something important missing as well we've not realised yet. Or if there's any way it could be the removers fault (despite being exceptionally competent so far), it feels like a waste for them to *have* insurance and yet for us not to claim on it. If I knew for sure what the contents were, I'd be happy to let it go, but if there's a chance some of the things had a little bit of sentimental value (even if only a little) it feels harder to write it off, even if I think I'm chasing a sunk cost.
I checked the old flat afterwards, and didn't find anything left behind.
I asked the removers, and they said they checked the van and didn't find anything left over.
There are four boxes of books from the spare bedroom I need to check, because we haven't got anywhere to put them yet, but it seems really odd the kitchen things would have been muddled in with them and not marked, all the other boxes were labelled very accurately.
I can't imagine how else they could possibly have disappeared. Accidentally unloaded at Liv's parents' house somehow? Accidentally dropped and smashed and discreetly disposed of? Someone left the van unguarded and someone stole a box marked "kitchen misc"? Sitting in the new living room in plain sight and we've been overlooking it all this time? Is there any obvious possibility I've overlooked?
Is there anything I should do? Look through the last boxes? Forget it? Ask the removers again?
It's probably most efficient to write those off, as the total cost is tiny compared to the total cost of the move. But I'm worried there's something important missing as well we've not realised yet. Or if there's any way it could be the removers fault (despite being exceptionally competent so far), it feels like a waste for them to *have* insurance and yet for us not to claim on it. If I knew for sure what the contents were, I'd be happy to let it go, but if there's a chance some of the things had a little bit of sentimental value (even if only a little) it feels harder to write it off, even if I think I'm chasing a sunk cost.
I checked the old flat afterwards, and didn't find anything left behind.
I asked the removers, and they said they checked the van and didn't find anything left over.
There are four boxes of books from the spare bedroom I need to check, because we haven't got anywhere to put them yet, but it seems really odd the kitchen things would have been muddled in with them and not marked, all the other boxes were labelled very accurately.
I can't imagine how else they could possibly have disappeared. Accidentally unloaded at Liv's parents' house somehow? Accidentally dropped and smashed and discreetly disposed of? Someone left the van unguarded and someone stole a box marked "kitchen misc"? Sitting in the new living room in plain sight and we've been overlooking it all this time? Is there any obvious possibility I've overlooked?
Is there anything I should do? Look through the last boxes? Forget it? Ask the removers again?
"or" in English
Feb. 17th, 2014 01:35 pmMy impression of "or" in English is that it can mean either "inclusive or" or "exclusive or" depending on context.
Example #1:
"Are you now or have you ever been a member of a communist party?"
"Would you like milk or sugar in your tea?"
"Don't trust someone if they're incompetent or malicious."
Obviously someone who IS NOW and also HAS BEEN IN THE PAST is supposed to answer "yes", not "no". You're allowed to ask for milk AND sugar. Incompetent malicious people are not automatically trustworthy.
Example #2:
"Would you like dinner now or would you like to freshen up first?"
"Eat in or take away?"
"Would you like the free gift or the cash equivalent?"
It would make no sense to ask for both.
And some of those questions have exactly the same form, it's just that you're supposed to know from context that having both is normal, or having both isn't being offered, or isn't possible.
However, I know some people say "in English, 'or' means 'inclusive or', even if sometimes common sense/politeness/physics stops you having both options at once" and some people say "in English, 'or' means 'exclusive or' but people sometimes use it sloppily and we know what they mean".
However, I can't really see the difference between those and "it can mean either depending on context". Is there any evidence that one of those is a superior description of the "default" interpretation (not just "which is more common", but "which people understand you really mean if you emphasise the meaning of the word").
Example #1:
"Are you now or have you ever been a member of a communist party?"
"Would you like milk or sugar in your tea?"
"Don't trust someone if they're incompetent or malicious."
Obviously someone who IS NOW and also HAS BEEN IN THE PAST is supposed to answer "yes", not "no". You're allowed to ask for milk AND sugar. Incompetent malicious people are not automatically trustworthy.
Example #2:
"Would you like dinner now or would you like to freshen up first?"
"Eat in or take away?"
"Would you like the free gift or the cash equivalent?"
It would make no sense to ask for both.
And some of those questions have exactly the same form, it's just that you're supposed to know from context that having both is normal, or having both isn't being offered, or isn't possible.
However, I know some people say "in English, 'or' means 'inclusive or', even if sometimes common sense/politeness/physics stops you having both options at once" and some people say "in English, 'or' means 'exclusive or' but people sometimes use it sloppily and we know what they mean".
However, I can't really see the difference between those and "it can mean either depending on context". Is there any evidence that one of those is a superior description of the "default" interpretation (not just "which is more common", but "which people understand you really mean if you emphasise the meaning of the word").
I'm really confused by the conversation about bitcoin.
What bitcoin is
Bitcoin basically serves the function of electronic cash. It has the benefits which physical cash has automatically but are hard to give to anything electronic: you don't have to prove your identity to spend it, you can just hand it over; it's anonymous[1]; it can't easily be counterfeited; and no central authority can arbitrarily decide to take it away from you.
It also has the drawbacks of physical cash: if you give it to someone, you can't get it back; and if it's stolen it's gone.
What bitcoin is not
What it is not is an electronic payment system, or a bank account. If you want to pay a credit card company 2% to assume liability in case you buy something and the seller reneges, major credit card companies only offer this service in major national currencies, not bitcoin or gold. If you want to put your money in a bank account and have the bank worry about security and/or invest the money on your behalf[2], you can only do that with national currencies, not bitcoin.
In fact, it's not cash, it's gold coins, cash with no government bank, backed by something that has little intrinsic value, but works because everyone sort of hopes it goes on working. Which sounds great until you realise that the government or central bank managing the money supply is actually really necessary for a healthy economy.
Up until recently governments hadn't got around to considering how banking regulations might apply. Now they have.
In other words, it works amazingly well as a first attempt at an electronic currency, but it's at the "stamping coins out of gold" stage, it has a while to go before it's as reliable as normal money for normal transactions (though it's moving very fast). And you can't easily run an economy on it.
Perception
To me, the conversation seems to have gone something like this:
Satoshi Nakamoto: Behold! An electronic currency.
Crypto geeks: Wow, we thought that was impossible. That's amazing. It will be useful for so many things.
Privacy geeks: Wow, maybe there is some solution to large multinationals having government-subpoenable records of every single transaction in our lives and which ones they might choose to consider "dangerous".
Newspaper opinion columns: HAHAHAHA! YOU SAID IT WAS AN ELECTRONIC PAYMENT SYSTEM AND IT ISN'T! YOU SO DUMB!
Internet libertarians: Wooo! It's like Cryptonomicon come to life. Removing the government from the currency will automatically make the economy better, because wishful thinking, despite most economists saying that's stupid.
Newspaper opinion columns: Also, do you think, maybe, appreciating in value 10000% might mean it's in a bubble? Hahahaha, geeks are so stupid.
Charlie Stross: NO! THE LIBERTARIANS TOUCHED IT! WE MUST IMMEDIATELY BURN IT TO THE GROUND AND SALT THE EARTH AND NEVER HAVE NICE THINGS EVER AGAIN! [3]
Stross is pretty knowledgeable about new technology. But I don't get, why are evaluating bitcoin based on whether it does what the newspaper opinion columnists and internet libertarians wanted?
Can we go back to talking about what the crypto geeks and privacy geeks wanted, because I thought that was kind of important!
Footnotes
[1] Details: there's a distributed public record of which public key bitcoins belong to. Theoretically, people don't know which person that public key belongs to, but if they study hard enough, they can figure it out based on who else it transfers money to. So if you do something the government doesn't like, you're not automatically safe. But if you want to accept bitcoins from someone, you don't need to know who they are.
[2] I wish those two things were more clearly delineated!
[3] Not exaggerating: http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/12/why-i-want-bitcoin-to-die-in-a.html#comments
What bitcoin is
Bitcoin basically serves the function of electronic cash. It has the benefits which physical cash has automatically but are hard to give to anything electronic: you don't have to prove your identity to spend it, you can just hand it over; it's anonymous[1]; it can't easily be counterfeited; and no central authority can arbitrarily decide to take it away from you.
It also has the drawbacks of physical cash: if you give it to someone, you can't get it back; and if it's stolen it's gone.
What bitcoin is not
What it is not is an electronic payment system, or a bank account. If you want to pay a credit card company 2% to assume liability in case you buy something and the seller reneges, major credit card companies only offer this service in major national currencies, not bitcoin or gold. If you want to put your money in a bank account and have the bank worry about security and/or invest the money on your behalf[2], you can only do that with national currencies, not bitcoin.
In fact, it's not cash, it's gold coins, cash with no government bank, backed by something that has little intrinsic value, but works because everyone sort of hopes it goes on working. Which sounds great until you realise that the government or central bank managing the money supply is actually really necessary for a healthy economy.
Up until recently governments hadn't got around to considering how banking regulations might apply. Now they have.
In other words, it works amazingly well as a first attempt at an electronic currency, but it's at the "stamping coins out of gold" stage, it has a while to go before it's as reliable as normal money for normal transactions (though it's moving very fast). And you can't easily run an economy on it.
Perception
To me, the conversation seems to have gone something like this:
Satoshi Nakamoto: Behold! An electronic currency.
Crypto geeks: Wow, we thought that was impossible. That's amazing. It will be useful for so many things.
Privacy geeks: Wow, maybe there is some solution to large multinationals having government-subpoenable records of every single transaction in our lives and which ones they might choose to consider "dangerous".
Newspaper opinion columns: HAHAHAHA! YOU SAID IT WAS AN ELECTRONIC PAYMENT SYSTEM AND IT ISN'T! YOU SO DUMB!
Internet libertarians: Wooo! It's like Cryptonomicon come to life. Removing the government from the currency will automatically make the economy better, because wishful thinking, despite most economists saying that's stupid.
Newspaper opinion columns: Also, do you think, maybe, appreciating in value 10000% might mean it's in a bubble? Hahahaha, geeks are so stupid.
Charlie Stross: NO! THE LIBERTARIANS TOUCHED IT! WE MUST IMMEDIATELY BURN IT TO THE GROUND AND SALT THE EARTH AND NEVER HAVE NICE THINGS EVER AGAIN! [3]
Stross is pretty knowledgeable about new technology. But I don't get, why are evaluating bitcoin based on whether it does what the newspaper opinion columnists and internet libertarians wanted?
Can we go back to talking about what the crypto geeks and privacy geeks wanted, because I thought that was kind of important!
Footnotes
[1] Details: there's a distributed public record of which public key bitcoins belong to. Theoretically, people don't know which person that public key belongs to, but if they study hard enough, they can figure it out based on who else it transfers money to. So if you do something the government doesn't like, you're not automatically safe. But if you want to accept bitcoins from someone, you don't need to know who they are.
[2] I wish those two things were more clearly delineated!
[3] Not exaggerating: http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2013/12/why-i-want-bitcoin-to-die-in-a.html#comments
Advice Day
Dec. 4th, 2013 01:07 pmvia Liv and wild_irises
If you had to give me one piece of advice (however ridiculous), what would it be?
If you had to give me one piece of advice (however ridiculous), what would it be?
Card Table
Dec. 2nd, 2013 10:44 pmWhere in Cambridge should I buy a card table? (ie. Small folding table normally green topped.) I assumed argos or john lewis, but they didn't seem immediately helpful, did I just miss the relevant listing?
source control workflow
Nov. 30th, 2013 07:21 pmWhen you use source control, do you normally check in first directly to a branch most people are working on, a publicly visible branch only normally you check in to, or a local/private branch?
Is there a protocol for checking in/merging? Code review? Tests pass? Just "don't break the build"? Nothing?
How often do you check in *somewhere*? How often do you check in/merge to a branch other people are actively using?
Is there a protocol for checking in/merging? Code review? Tests pass? Just "don't break the build"? Nothing?
How often do you check in *somewhere*? How often do you check in/merge to a branch other people are actively using?
Which source control?
Nov. 18th, 2013 10:32 pmWhich source control do you use at work? Which source control would you use for preference, if different? Which source control do you want to die in a fire?
Poll: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GC6XJ3W
I'm experimenting with alternatives to dreamwidth polls. This is from SurveyMonkey. You don't need to sign in or anything. It shows results afterwards (or if you want to see them again, just click "done" on an empty form).
But it obviously doesn't tie results to DW/LJ account, and it's awkward to see the results. Does anyone recommend anything that does good simple polls? Basically like doodle.com, but for anything, not just dates. Ideally (a) really simple (b) allows multiple questions (c) no log in (d) everyone can see the results?
Poll: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/GC6XJ3W
I'm experimenting with alternatives to dreamwidth polls. This is from SurveyMonkey. You don't need to sign in or anything. It shows results afterwards (or if you want to see them again, just click "done" on an empty form).
But it obviously doesn't tie results to DW/LJ account, and it's awkward to see the results. Does anyone recommend anything that does good simple polls? Basically like doodle.com, but for anything, not just dates. Ideally (a) really simple (b) allows multiple questions (c) no log in (d) everyone can see the results?
Clothes Horse
Nov. 18th, 2013 10:22 pmIf you hear someone described as a "clothes horse", does that mean "well dressed"? Or "expensively dressed"? Or "expensively but badly dressed"? Or "badly dressed"?
It's the sort of usage I normally pick up from reading books, but I've often found the usage ambiguous, and I can see the metaphor both ways round, so it's not obvious to me, even though I feel it should be self-evident!
It's the sort of usage I normally pick up from reading books, but I've often found the usage ambiguous, and I can see the metaphor both ways round, so it's not obvious to me, even though I feel it should be self-evident!
How do you enter landline telephone numbers[1], when you know at least two of the people living there about equally well?
Do you enter it for both people? Or have a separate entry for the shared surname (if appropriate), house name, or "Name1 and Name2"? Or something else?
[1] Or other shared telephone numbers, although that rarely happens. Most of the time I want to speak to someone specific, and only having one phone for multiple people was a technical limitation. OTOH, sometimes, you DO want to speak to either person ("Are you and Otherhalf free on Saturday?"), maybe there should be a built-in option to route the call to either of their mobile phones?
Do you enter it for both people? Or have a separate entry for the shared surname (if appropriate), house name, or "Name1 and Name2"? Or something else?
[1] Or other shared telephone numbers, although that rarely happens. Most of the time I want to speak to someone specific, and only having one phone for multiple people was a technical limitation. OTOH, sometimes, you DO want to speak to either person ("Are you and Otherhalf free on Saturday?"), maybe there should be a built-in option to route the call to either of their mobile phones?
Flash hazard lights to say "thank you"
Nov. 9th, 2013 02:15 pmFor a while, I've noticed cars flashing both indicators simultaneously (presumably by turning hazard lights on then off again) to say "thank you" for letting them in.
I think I first noticed it by lorries -- google suggests it may have been a lorry driver custom first.
I really like the idea of being able to say "thank you" or "sorry" as well as "please" or "get out of my way" when driving.
Am I right that it's new, or did I just not notice when I started driving?
Presumably it's not allowed (just like flashing headlights to say "excuse me" or "after you" or "do you know your lights are on/there's something wrong with your car/etc" was never an authorised use according to the highway code). Is it a bad idea, or not?
I think I first noticed it by lorries -- google suggests it may have been a lorry driver custom first.
I really like the idea of being able to say "thank you" or "sorry" as well as "please" or "get out of my way" when driving.
Am I right that it's new, or did I just not notice when I started driving?
Presumably it's not allowed (just like flashing headlights to say "excuse me" or "after you" or "do you know your lights are on/there's something wrong with your car/etc" was never an authorised use according to the highway code). Is it a bad idea, or not?
Bathroom Signage
Nov. 4th, 2013 01:28 pmHow should toilets be signed in an ideal world?
I decided to try a third party poll site, though I'm not sure I like this one:
http://www.polljunkie.com/poll/eijrsw/bathroom-signage
(If you have gendered toilets at all, rather than unisex-only.)
I don't like the skirt/no-skirt symbols, but all the others seem more open to misinterpretation.
I decided to try a third party poll site, though I'm not sure I like this one:
http://www.polljunkie.com/poll/eijrsw/bathroom-signage
(If you have gendered toilets at all, rather than unisex-only.)
I don't like the skirt/no-skirt symbols, but all the others seem more open to misinterpretation.