Reads to me like the author is trying to elicit some empathy. It just sounds like he was just fine leaving his family for a job. Not getting paid couldn’t have factored into that decision.
He doesnt provide any context for that if so and if you look around the site, doesn't seem like the case at all. More like he just decided on the phone something interested him enough to bounce indefinitely.
The assumption with taking a contract is it's better than what your other options will be to get the same total income/time worked. Especially for specialized work like this, taking the contract means you can get multiples of the time back in the following months. When you don't get paid you end up without that time back the income was supposed to provide (and you're in 1 months less of savings to boot).
They work within a niche space, as others have said, they follow where the work is, So they are able to charge more which I hope is able for them to survive in modern economy and be able to give more time to their family.
atleast that's my interpretation of it of how logic might follow if they are working in niche space, many people seem to be applying the logic onto themselves into completely standard situation, but I don't suppose that is the case here.
Hope this helps in genuinely understanding their situation, from my reading/thinking about it.
Didn’t realize it needed saying but I left the child and did the work in exchange for money I needed (still need) to feed the child.
Many people do this every day. I do it when it makes sense or the conditions require, which is to say I am a WFH contractor who sometimes works on site occasionally.
Is that the benchmark? A website that disables the right click to prevent visitors from saving the content can still be saved by the browser. That’s an active measure to disable downloads being circumvented by the browser. So is Chrome going down?
Because they’re put there as a box ticking exercise without ever being given the power or resources to be able to do damage or negatively impact the bottom line of the big rule breakers. It’s just supposed to maintain the appearance of doing something without ever supporting these activities for real. For the most part they are a true Potemkin village. If the risk is diffuse (just some average Joe suckers will lose money) I wouldn’t hold my breath that anyone is controlling for real.
I just replaced my OnePlus 5 a couple of months ago at over 8.5 years old. No repairs needed, battery was a bit crippled in active use, especially making calls, but fine for a mostly idling phone. In idle it still lasts longer than a 1.5 year old iPhone 15. I still use it for by backup phone number SIM, as it slowly gets to ~9 years old.
The bigger issue was no more OS updates since 2020, and no Play updates since 2023. The battery can be replaced but getting a fully updated OS is more involved.
OnePlus 5 runs great with custom ROMs, including potentially ones based on mainline Linux as opposed to AOSP. (The Linux support is not as good as OP 6/6T but getting there pretty nicely.)
Too bad they have these long lists of "this doesn't work so well" and I'm too time constrained to troubleshoot for too long or dig for solutions. And I'd also need to replace the battery. It's an option for when I actually have some time.
The device integrity is a bigger deal, this is also a backup for some banking apps so if they don't work it kind of defeats the purpose. I removed all other apps to minimize the attacks surface.
If you're using it as backup for banking apps and the like I totally get not running a custom ROM on it! But you could also set that backup on something even cheaper, any one of the random not-bootloader-unlockable brands, and be left with the OP5 as a Linux phone. You're also right that the Linux support on OP5 is not up to standard yet, this is more of a question for the future if that support improves.
What's cheaper than an already existing phone that would otherwise stay unused or end up in the landfill (recycling center)? It could also be a great experimentation platform, play with Linux on the phone, but the time I have available now leaves little room for this kind of play.
The goal is not "experimentation" but having it eventually as an always up-to-date daily driver once the support for it matures. You're quite right that we're still a bit far from that, though.
Some April Fools jokes hit too close to home to make. Does easydns really want to have their brand associated with this kind of news in a world where so many people just read the title?
The suggestion that Cuba would risk that for no obvious benefit is weird. Some wildcards in Cuba might be doing this unsanctioned. But any Cuban sanctioned/sponsored attack is very unrealistic.
Cuba is the easiest target the US could have. It's very close to the US and very far from any potential ally. The US has never shied away from committing acts of extreme cruelty, well into terrorist or war crime territory. From dropping nuclear bombs on civilians, phosphorus bombs, drone bombing innocent people, schools, hospitals, institutionalized torture, etc. even with far weaker reasons.
There is no scenario where a direct attack on the US wouldn't lead to an extremely violent response in complete disregard of Cuban lives. And get away with it.
The press was stupid. They were doing stupid gotchas like swiftboats, fake reports on GWB (Dan Rather), but couldn’t care less about things like the CIA and the crack cocaine connection[1], or lots of other things the government gets away with (including Clappers total information awareness unconstitutional surveillance efforts) The press is always carrying water for someone but that someone is rarely the public unless is just pure coincidence.
[1] there was one reporter who dared but the toll from the story resulted in his suicide, some years later. His colleagues poo-pooed his reporting on the connection.
* The Swiftboat thing was completely an ad campaign if I remember correctly.
I remember most media covering it as BS.
* The contents of Dan Rather report on GWB was true. There was one document
which was sketchy, but the whole report didn't hinge on the one document
from an officer's office. (E.g. Ex-senator Ben Barnes's interview is reasonably
indicting: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/transcript-barnes-on-bush/)
The media did fall down though. Only one outlet went to the the Officer's
secretary (who was still alive) to ask if she had typed the document.
She looked at it and said (summarizing here) that it wasn't the document
she typed, but it was the same contents.
What's interesting is how easily the media is distracted. What's even more
concerning though, is that when the more centrist major media has tried to
be less gullible, they've been vilified. (E.g. trying not to be suckered
by miraculous appearance Hunter Biden's laptop.)
It's a mess, and the only way out of it is probably limits own media ownership.
I watched it a few days ago and this descriptive title was part of the reason I clicked. I generally trust 3B1B anyway but normally a title like "This picture broke my brain" would put me off.
In case you're curious, when I ran that title/thumbnail AB test, the option "This picture broke my brain" did end up winning. I was a bit disappointed, because I didn't really _want_ it to win, but I did include it out of curiosity. Ultimately, I changed it to the other title, mostly because I like it better, and the margin was small.
I was genuinely torn about how to title this, because one of my aims is that it stands to be enjoyed by people outside the usual online-math-viewing circles, especially the first 12 minutes, and leaning into the idea of a complex log risks alienating some of those.
That level of granularity would be interesting. For what it's worth, the metric they go by is not click-through rate; it's expected total watch time. For example, if you have two thumbnails, A and B, and for every 100 impressions of A, there are 51 total minutes of watch time, and for every 100 impressions of B, there are 49 total, then what you'd see in the dashboard is "51% A, 49% B". More total clicks with less engagement will not necessarily win out.
I generally agree that it's a pretty wild choice to just let creators put up multiple titles. That said, it's hard not to play with the shiny toy when it's sitting right there, especially if you know it may mean the lesson reaches more people. In this case, I genuinely don't know what the "right" title is, even setting engagement aside. Is it fundamentally about analyzing an Escher piece? Is it fundamentally a lesson on complex analysis, and complex logs in particular? It's both, but you don't always want to cram two stories into one title. This becomes all the more challenging when titles are, inescapably, marketing.
perhaps a bit inappropriate of me to say so here as it is off-topic, but i am going to take the opportunity anyways:
big thanks for all of your work making math both enjoyable and accessible. my kids (and i) love your videos. your positive impact extends far and wide.
As annoying as those titles are, the work that you (and few others, like Veritasium) do makes it well worth the tradeoff. Just keep reminding everyone that the annoying title gets the video into the brain of thousands of other people who aren't subscribed yet. It's a tiny price to pay for astounding value.
Everyone who watches your videos loves them and wants everyone else to watch them.
I often read about invasive species from a Western point of view and some of the most aggressive and hard to keep under control species come from Asia. Is the Asian ecosystem equally invaded by Western species? Are forests, gardens, or lakes in Asia overrun by European carp and grey oyster mushrooms? Or is there something about the environment and ecosystem in Asia that makes those species uniquely invasive and resistant?
For example the Japanese knotweed evolved to grow on the side of volcanoes and survive the occasional lava flow. It's a uniquely harsh environment which prepares it for thriving in any "gentle" garden in the world. But the mushrooms didn't evolve in any particularly bad environment, so why are these species outcompeting local ones? Why are they so fit for a new environment?
I know I have some selection and survivorship bias because I only know of the species that made it, not the ones which try to invade and fail so that's why I'm curious if this is a special situation, or more or less expected because a known percentage of species from any part of the world end up outcompeting local species from another.
reply