> and memory on the computer to hold an entire page of pixels. I mean, at 72dpi that's 50KB just for the data!
Fwiw it was common for text editors at the time to render/raster in chunks and then send that off to the printer. For complicated documents, the printer sometimes had to take pauses while the computer worked
It’s worth noting that this tweet thread makes some major mistakes, both in dates and in roles. For example, while she was hired by NASA after Apollo 8, she had already been working in a substantial capacity on Apollo software at the Draper lab at mit, which was contracted/hired to do the work. Much of the software written for and by NASA at that time was not actually written by engineers under NASA’s employ.
Which is to say, by the time, NASA hired her she had been working on the software for many years. And, additionally, she had been working on similar software even before that!
I think that it would be safe to describe that Twitter thread as suffering from a deviation from reality.
He is making that correction regarding her timeline of employment/coding work himself in this thread. If you want to dismiss the entire thread due to a self-admitted correction thats your prerogative.
That was just one example of an egregious mistake. There are more, many more.
also, It’s the fundamental claim of the thread, and it casts the rest of the logic into doubt. His correction is just as un based in reality and also has errors.
> What an incredible rabbit hole. Margaret Hamilton, awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom for "[leading] the team that created the on-board flight software" for the Apollo missions, wasn't even hired until after the completed software had already flown to the moon in Apollo 8!
It’s vastly more complicated than “apple opens an api”. iMessage does a lot more than just messaging, and key components of apples spam and fraud story are tied to individual devices.
For Apple to open iMessage, would require that android manufacturers enroll the devices.
I use an iPhone, and I try to get all my friends to use signal
By her own admission she was on an unimportant part of the project when she joined in 1965. She was recorded working on completely unrelated stuff in 63. When she was actually promoted to leadership the work was already done
I like that Signal is open source, but I dislike their insistence on shutting down third party clients, because I believe third party clients are almost universally better than first-party ones.
In addition, their continued reluctance to add an export or any kind of meaningful history backup is also a negative.
I think telegram is a great tradeoff. Not as secure (by default it is not even e2e), but their clients on every platform are just slick and very great.
Feature by feature, and doing a cost comparison, shows that iPhones are very good value. But they don’t have a phone under $400. And even in the developed world that’s a lot of money.
Yeah, you can get an android phone that will take pictures, send messages, play, music, run Uber/maps, and take calls for under $50. Those phones aren’t great, but they are usable. They can do everything that you “need” a smart phone to do.
It’s been a bit since I was in the cheap android phone market, but those phones don’t work as well as you say. Calling texting probably work fine, but I doubt Uber or maps will work great or at all. Anything internet heavy like that and you’re gonna be crazy frustrated
I would rather buy a used iphone for slightly more then. Less need to manufacture shit that will barely make it a year, better support and better hardware.
An older, once premium model can be a good middle ground. I usually buy used and had a Note4 for several years, then my SO used it, then I used it again, then we resold it in working condition. It also had a swappable battery and card slot. Both likely helped extend its life.
How are they not usable? I use a Nokia 7.2 and I think it's a perfect phone. Good screen. Pure Android. Fast. Nice camera (though I really don't care about this). It has 64GB of internal storage, but adding an SD card was straightforward.
Eh, sort of. Important parts of the OS did eventually get recycled. But NeXT was sold in 1996, and OS X didn't come out until 2001. And the hardware ambitions were a total crater. I'd say it worked out much better for Jobs than NeXT.
The guy who did this (Simpson Garfinkel) was known for writing several books about programming for the NeXT. He later wrote a book on Cocoa programming in the early years of OS X that was clearly just a modification of one of his NeXT books (as especially in the early versions OS X was basically still NeXTStep underneath), so Garfinkel managed to get something out of his NeXT days despite the symbolic ending of it by burning his cube.
Criminal conspiracy is a real sort of thing that actually happens. There's nothing wrong with speculating about such circumstances. If anything, I think hypothesizing that it was a lone wolf attack is more zany, given similar attacks being carried out in other areas.
Real conspiracies of all different types happen all the time. A conspiracy is just two or more people secretly doing something together. Any speculation about two or more people doing anything is a conspiracy theory. It would typically have to be “something bad”, but that’s really a matter of perspective.
> "Any speculation about two or more people doing anything is a conspiracy theory."
If I see two people known to be in a relationship (but who haven't talked to me about sex) and say to my friend "I bet they love sex!" then it's a theory about those two people sure, but there's no suggestion that those two people have a conspiracy to hide the existence of their sex, they just haven't told me about it. Or going a step further than a "taboo" subject, speculating about which supermarket the two people I see carrying a loaf of bread have just been to.
(But you do make a good point reminding that a conspiracy is just a normal secret thing, not some crazy government-level only type of terminology.)
If you want to be super pedantic then my description is perfectly in line with the definition of a secret, which can by definition be anything that is unknown, and you would only speculate about things that are unknown. Your example seems silly because we could culturally have the expectation that that is happening, even if it’s unsaid. But if you were to change the cultural context to say, somewhere that would be illegal, then it wouldn’t seem silly to describe that as a conspiracy at all.
However my point is that conspiracies are very common place, and a majority of the discussion/commentary about them would by definition be conspiracy theories. Stating this should really only be a casually observing a simple fact, but unfortunately it’s quite a controversial statement to make, because dismissing something as a conspiracy theory has become a mainstream technique for discrediting an idea/argument/person… without engaging with it on any level.
Yeah I completely agree with you (and hoped my last paragraph would show that I wasn't disagreeing with the substance of your previous comment).
But back on the pedantic side... bringing in the definition of 'secret' isn't relavent because we weren't using that word - 'conspiracy' doesn't mean "a secret exists", it means "two or more people are plotting to keep something secret", it needs intent. You don't know what my friend and I just ate for lunch, so you could argue that's a secret, but if you asked what I ate then I'd not have a problem telling you, because it's not a conspiracy.
And nor is illegality needed, though I think most definitions or 'conspiracy' do include it being something that people could consider being negative in some way; I'm not sure planning a surprise birthday party could ever be classed as a 'conspiracy' (except tongue-in-cheek).
What do you mean? Law enforcement doesn't comment on details of an investigation except when asking for help finding suspects. If they have suspects they have to investigate quietly until they have enough evidence for an arrest.
Gumroad is part of a movement of “friendly” drm. You’re paying for support and updates. Intercepting a tls call is easier said than done, but the ethos is around accepting pirates gonna pirate.
Intercepting a TLS call is dead easy if you are one of the endpoints, namely the client. You can just add your proxy's certificate to the machines valid certs and bobs your uncle. Cert pinning is a thing but it can also be defeated, especially if all the app is doing it to pin cert is asking the OS TLS facilities nicely to pin a cert, because OS TLS facilities are also user-controlled.
Any shop worth their salt is going to embed the cert chain in their app. In fact, you get that for free with pretty much every drm lib, such as the ones major providers like steam, gumroad, etc suggest
Cert pinning can defeated, but like I said, easier said than done. Not super advanced, but still requires specialized knowledge and a willingness to put the effort in.
Fwiw it was common for text editors at the time to render/raster in chunks and then send that off to the printer. For complicated documents, the printer sometimes had to take pauses while the computer worked