Fabulous explanation of the Strong Equivalence Principle coupled with a nice bit of recent research to prove that it holds true even in extreme gravitational fields (and therefore disproving a few interesting fringe theories). It’s hard science made to enjoy like pop science: yay! Plus a Hitch-Hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy reference, to boot. Under 10,000 views; go show them some love.
This is not your typical How To Play. I’ll bet you never knew the real rules for Carcassonne…
The day that Mitchell Hurwitz starts making shallow humor is the day that we rip the mask off of Mitchell Hurwitz and find the real Mitchell Hurwitz bound in his own cellar.
Throughout the first three seasons of Arrested Development, we were treated to some ridiculous attention to details, hidden clues, foreshadowing, Easter eggs, and in-jokes. For instance, ever wonder what was with the obsession with seals in the first few seasons? They were actually a metaphor for Lucille Bluth, the matriarch of the family, who kept poor baby Buster Bluth, a juice-loving man child, terrified of ever leaving the nest (or entering the ocean). As an act of defiance, Buster enters the ocean and gets his hand bitten off by a “loose seal.” Loose. Seal. “Lucille.” Do I need to add a “GET IT?!” there?
But that’s not even the crazy part. As we’ve talked about before, the hand being bitten off was foreshadowed throughout the entire season. In one episode in season three, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission attempts to persuade Tobias Funke, a struggling actor, into cooperating with them and becoming a mole in the Bluth family. He misunderstands the entire situation and inadvertently becomes a mole (in all senses of the word — by which I mean he fucking dresses like a mole.) But the real mole in the family was right under our noses all along since season one …
However, all of this is just a teaser for the grandest mystery in Arrested Development: that of “Nichael Bluth.”
Tom Scott’s new YouTube game show, Lateral, has just finished it’s first series. Start watching from here, if you’re at all interested… and you should be, it’s funny and clever (albeit in a very different way to Citation Needed).
It’s never easy to crack into a market with an innovative new product but makers of the “world’s first smart fingerprint padlock” have made one critical error: they forgot about the existence of screwdrivers.
Tapplock raised $320,000 in 2016 for their product that would allow you to use just your finger to open the “unbreakable” lock. Amazing. Things took a turn for the worse when the ship date of September came and went, and backers complained that the upstart has stopped posting any updates and wasn’t responding to emails nor social media posts.
But after months of silence, the startup assured El Reg that everything was still moving forward and the delays were due to “issues with manufacturing in China.”
Fast forward 18 months and finally – finally – the $100 Tapplock is out on the market and it is… well, how do we put this kindly? Somewhat flawed.
VICTORIA, BC – After data collection from thousands of parties across the country, reports are coming in that the annoying person who brings an acoustic guitar to a party is now officially less hated than the person who expects everyone to sit down and play Cards Against Humanity.
“At least when some asshole starts playing the tune to Wonderwall you can get up and go to a different room,” says Michelle Kalleta, 22, avid partygoer. “Jerks who show up with any sort of card game expect everyone to play, and the last thing I want to do at a party is sit in a circle with a bunch of people who think they’re hilariously edgy.”
Last night I attended the always excellent JS Oxford, and as well as having my mind expanded by both Jo and Ruth’s talks (Lemmings make an excellent analogy for multi-threading, who knew!), I gave a brief talk on the Indieweb movement. If you’ve not heard of Indieweb movement before, it’s a pu...
Last night I attended the always excellent JS Oxford, and as well as having my mind expanded by both Jo and Ruth’s talks (Lemmings make an excellent analogy for multi-threading, who knew!), I gave a brief talk on the Indieweb movement.
If you’ve not heard of Indieweb movement before, it’s a push to encourage people to claim their own bit of the web, for their identity and content, free from corporate platforms. It’s not about abandoning those platforms, but ensuring that you have control of your content if something goes wrong.
From the Indieweb site:
Your content is yours
When you post something on the web, it should belong to you, not a corporation. Too many companies have gone out of business and lost all of their users’ data. By joining the IndieWeb, your content stays yours and in your control.
You are better connected
Your articles and status messages can go to all services, not just one, allowing you to engage with everyone. Even replies and likes on other services can come back to your site so they’re all in one place.
I’ve been interested in the Indieweb for a while, after attending IndieWebCamp Brighton in 2016, and I’ve been slowly implementing Indieweb features on here ever since.
So far I’ve added
rel="me"attributes to allow distributed verification, and to enable Indieauth support,
h-cardto establish identity, and
h-entryfor information discovery. Behind the scenes I’m looking at webmentions (Thanks to Perch’s first class support), and there’s the ever-eternal photo management thing I keep picking up and then running away from.
The great thing about the Indieweb is that you can implement as much or as little as you want, and it always gives you something to work on. It doesn’t matter where you start. The act of getting your own domain is the first step on a longer journey.
I’m so excited to see that there are others in Oxford who care about IndieWeb things! I’ve honestly fantasised myself about running an IndieWebCamp or Homebrew Website Club here, but let’s face it: that fantasy is more one of a world in which I had the free time for such a venture. So imagine my delight when somebody else offers to do the hard work!
Once upon a time there was a giant called Rab who lived in Glasgow and almost no one came to his door to kill him anymore. He had lived there since the time before legend, long before there even was a Glasgow, when giants and witches and kings and fairies and goblins fought, loved, and tricked their way across the land. It was a time when you had to live on your wits and you could only survive by being clever enough to escape from the traps and tricks that you‘ll have heard about in other fairy stories. It was a time of hotheads and feuds but luckily for him Rab was a more thoughtful person who managed to survive, more by avoiding than outwitting or fighting. So it was that he kept living in Glasgow right up to the present day.
Beautiful, fabulous modern-day fairytale.
There is an American principle that success is more about what you are making than what you are worth, and even less about being able to stop working. This is a brilliant cultural driver for a strong economy as it celebrates working billionaires. In Britain, the dream is more about making money then cashing in and going to sit on a beach somewhere. Maybe there is also a third way where, when you no longer worry about where the next meal is coming from or you family is reasonably secure, you then turn down the money-making drive to ‘maintenance’ mode, ease off on stress, and put your energies into what you like rather than what you must.
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.
You are at a party and overhear a conversation between Lucy and her friend.
In the conversation, Lucy mentions she has a secret number that is less than 100.
She also confesses the following information:
“The number is uniquely describable by the answers to the following four questions:”
Q1) Is the number divisible by two?
Q2) Is the number divisible by three?
Q3) Is the number divisible by five?
Q4) Is the number divisible by seven?
I loved this puzzle. I first solved it a brute-force way, with Excel. Then I found increasingly elegant and logical solutions. Then I shared it with some friends: I love it! Go read the whole thing.
Dr. Doe doing her thing again. Stay curious!
Today, just about all monitors and screens are digital (typically using an LCD or Plasma technology), but a decade or two ago, computer displays were based on the analog technology inherited from TV sets.
These analog displays were constructed around Cathode Rays Tubes (commonly referred to as CRTs).
Analog TV has a fascinating history from when broadcasts were first started (in Black and White), through to the adoption of color TV (using a totally backwards-compatible system with the earlier monochrome standard), through to cable, and now digital.
Analog TV transmissions and their display technology really were clever inventions (and the addition of colour is another inspiring innovation). It’s worth taking a look about how these devices work, and how they were designed, using the technology of the day.
After a couple of false starts, an analog colour TV system, that was backwards compatible with black and white, became standard in 1953, and remained unchanged until the take-over by digital TV broadcasts in the early 2000’s.
I’ve come to believe that the goal of any good framework should be to make itself unnecessary. Brian said it explicitly of his PhoneGap project: The ultimate purpose of PhoneGap is to cease to exist. That makes total sense, especially if your code is a polyfill—those solutions are temporary by d...
When Google first unveiled AMP, its intentions weren’t clear to me. I hoped that it existed purely to make itself redundant:
As well as publishers creating AMP versions of their pages in order to appease Google, perhaps they will start to ask “Why can’t our regular pages be this fast?” By showing that there is life beyond big bloated invasive web pages, perhaps the AMP project will work as a demo of what the whole web could be.
Alas, as time has passed, that hope shows no signs of being fulfilled. If anything, I’ve noticed publishers using the existence of their AMP pages as a justification for just letting their “regular” pages put on weight.
Worse yet, the messaging from Google around AMP has shifted. Instead of pitching it as a format for creating parallel versions of your web pages, they’re now also extolling the virtues of having your AMP pages be the only version you publish:
In fact, AMP’s evolution has made it a viable solution to build entire websites.
On an episode of the Dev Mode podcast a while back, AMP was a hotly-debated topic. But even those defending AMP were doing so on the understanding that it was more a proof-of-concept than a long-term solution (and also that AMP is just for news stories—something else that Google are keen to change).
But now it’s clear that the Google AMP Project is being marketed more like a framework for the future: a collection of web components that prioritise performance
You all know my feelings on AMP already, I’m sure. As Jeremy points out, our optimistic ideas that these problems might go away as AMP “made itself redundant” are turning out not to be true, and Google continues to abuse its monopoly on search to push its walled-garden further into the mainstream. Read his full article…