I maintain a few applications for Garmin's ecosystem in Monkey C and I share the same sentiment. While Lua's syntax might "feel weird" to some, it has standard tooling (language server, formatter, etc.) that could be leveraged. Instead, Garmin is on their own with a hand-rolled VSCode plugin and their own type checker implemented in Java.
I really don't understand why they were compelled to make their own language.
I went to high school when cell phones were common and most students had them. But, at least at my school, if you had one out during class it was instantly confiscated and returned by the front office after school. I assumed this was the norm, so articles about "cell phone bans" as a new policy are surprising to me. I assumed it always was this way.
When did schools start allowing cell phone use during class? Do teachers no longer have the power to confiscate devices that are used at inappropriate times?
There are teachers out there asking students to look up words in their phone. They forget to add "and please ignore all notifications, games, etc. while you're at it".
And then there are kahoots, which makes learning a game (you don't need effort!) and exercises are automatically corrected (so teachers don't need effort either).
Using a phone during class was indeed never an option, but, can I ask you since you went to school with smartphones (I am much older): Is your experience that most students pull their phone out as soon as they exit the classrooms? Do they spend most of their breaks on their screens? If so do you have the feeling you have poorer conversational skills because of this and would you not rather have just enjoyed school engaging with the people around you?
I see youngsters now that have hundreds of messages a day, on many platforms, and consequently hours of screen time a day. Does it not feel like this time would be better spends in face to face engagements?
I read about girls that are just tired, they have a good time, everybody gossips on Social Media, they have to maintain "status" there, streaks, presence, likes, it never ends, last thing before sleep, first thing after waking up. It sounds so exhausting.
Banning cell phones from class hours doesn't actually change the social media rat race in any way. You still have to maintain presence. That's just part of being social.
We had the same distractions before smart phones. We would just hide in the computer lab and browse the Internet while playing games and trying to look busy. A hundred messages sounds like about a half hour of conversation on any chat platform.
We would still play games on our calculators, sign in to IRC, and post on forums. Now it's cell phone games, discord, and twitter but really it's the same shit.
The idea behind banning cell phones is more about attention span and the unfortunate reality of constant dopamine hits.
Yes, there were distractions in my time as well, but I would say it's quite different because now you don't have to go anywhere, you can just pull out your phone mid-conversation and 'be somewhere else'.
I do think (hope?) the temporary removal of dopamine hits works in the long run. If I'm regularly not near my phone to check on whatever, the impulse to grab my phone is removed, because I'm engrossed in other things. Do that often enough and it may just wean people off of this online crack.
I went to grade school in the 80’s and high school and college in the 90’s.
It wasn’t anything like you describe at all. For better or worse people did actually talk to each other.
And while we did call each other on the phone reasonably often, generally when you weren’t in the room with someone you weren’t communicating with them at all.
I believe most UK schools have the same policy. However, I've heard from teacher friends that it's difficult and time-consuming to enforce -- kids will do anything to sneak in a bit of phone time during lessons.
If you really needed to use it, you had time between periods and during lunch.
The people campaigning about this are concerned about that too.
> When did schools start allowing cell phone use during class?
I wonder to what extent this is an effect of the age of the teachers themselves. The median age of a teacher in the US is ~40 years old, so a significant proportion of them are accustomed to phones being an essential part of social life and hence may be a bit more lenient to students occasionally checking their phone when it appears to be non-disruptive. Needless to say though, this easily becomes a non-fallacious slippery slope.
Kids are great at detecting hypocrisy. As a teacher, you can't tell a kid to make it through the day without "checking" their phones if you can't make it through the day without checking your own phone.
No, it's 100% the parents. The parents are younger, and phone addicted too. And I don't know what happened in the past 20 ish years but parents are unbelievably entitled.
Many parents freak out if you take their kid's phone. That's not okay anymore, I guess. Detention doesn't really exist either because parents don't want it. Even summer school is just a suggestion at this point. Parents have bullied their local ISD's into being weak.
I don’t think this is discussed enough when PLCs are compared to other embedded systems (such as this product).
Through a PLC’s IDE, which is almost always proprietary software provided by the PLC manufacturer, a developer has the ability to view variable values, edit their values, “force” or “lock” a variable to a specific value (making assignments to that variable a no-op), and make edits to the code logic. This can all be done while maintaining the realtime guarantees of the system. These features (called “online editing” by PLC manufacturers) are essential in many applications where PLCs are used and are the biggest differentiator between a PLC and any other embedded system, such as Arduino’s products.
GDB-style debugging of a desktop program or JTAG/SWO debugging of a microcontroller can do some of what a PLC IDE can do, but it’s not as reliable and safe as PLC products.
This is notable not because of the board itself, but because of the incredibly small footprint of the MCU on it. This chip is ~40% smaller than the already tiny Kinetis KL02.
While the Broad institute is private, it is a non-profit that is tightly affiliated with MIT and Harvard. To me, this is different than a patent getting transferred to a multinational pharmaceutical corporate.
Non-profits can still have patent portfolios that they try to exploit for commercial gain -- though by licensing, rather than producing products directly. When the research was publicly funded, the same conflicts of interest apply.
You're confusing Panic (the software/video game company behind this device's concept and software) with Teenage Engineering (a Swedish hardware company that designed the device)
Teenage Engineering has a variety of products unrelated to this game console, including the ITX case.
This is not true. 5 axis mills and 9+ DOF CNC mill/turn centers exist, and they are becoming more common, however 3 axis vertical mills are still the backbone of most machine shops.
One of the things that is happening now is that the entire PhotoDNA system is finally coming under the level of oversight that it should have had right from the start.
I can tell you from working in this area that it's possible for someone to have their lives ruined by a misplaced investigation, have that investigation abandoned because they turn out to be obviously innocent, and for that to not be well-known, because people simply would not understand the context.
Before this Apple scandal, if you'd written to your reepresentative or a journalist or an activist group and said "I was framed for child abuse because of computer program that misidentified innocent pictures", they would attach a very low priority to dealing with you or publicising this. And almost all people who have experienced this kind of nightmare really don't want to re-live it in public for some tiny possibility of real justice being served for them, or for others. They just want it to all go away.
We certainly have Apple's PR blunder to thank for that, but if PhotoDNA always held that potential for abuse due to its very nature, why did we remain silent for 13 years?
Maybe it's because Google and Microsoft and others' policy of security through obscurity actually succeeded in preventing the details of PhotoDNA from coming to light, and it took Apple exposing their hashing model to reverse engineering by including it on the device for people to finally wake up.
Before this whole Apple client-side scanning debacle... seems pretty likely. A lot of privacy-focused people also avoid Google and Microsoft cloud services like the plague and trusted Apple up to this point to protect their privacy. The fact that Apple was (and is) scanning iCloud Photos libraries for CSAM unbeknownst to most of us is just another violation of that trust and shows just how far the "what happens on your iphone, stays on your iphone" privacy marketing extends (read: not past your iphone, and sometimes not even on your iphone).
I think the actual issue is that Apple wasn't scanning enough user data, so the government or the FBI or some other external force was holding them accountable for it out of public view, and Apple was pressured into increasing the amount of scanning they conducted.
"U.S. law requires tech companies to flag cases of child sexual abuse to the authorities. Apple has historically flagged fewer cases than other companies. Last year, for instance, Apple reported 265 cases to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, while Facebook reported 20.3 million, according to the center’s statistics. That enormous gap is due in part to Apple’s decision not to scan for such material, citing the privacy of its users."
[1]
You are commenting a lot for this many places in the thread. Are you arguing for this system or for Apple? It reads like pro-Apple and doesn't add anything except "I think it is good, therefore it is good".
If you have a point which you feel rebuts a common argument, it seems reasonable to leave that comment in places you see that argument. The alternative is "minority positions should be drowned out", no?
I attended a large state school in the early 2010’s and I witnessed a lot of the things described in the article. Many affluent out-of-state students had dorm rooms lushly decorated with disposable tchotchkes. Most of this is completely between the students and parent, however, there definitely was some sort of commercialization involving university administrators.
At the beginning of every school year, the university distributed marketing material literature for services such as:
- On campus “pop-up shops” for dorm decorations
- Overpriced minifridge rentals
- Overpriced and low quality linens/sheets/towels
- Organized shopping trips to department stores (students were bussed from campus to the store and the store was closed to the public)
The advertisements were often construed as official university services, but were actually just lead generators for 3rd party businesses.
Obviously, the university was getting some sort of kickback for all of this.
That all definitely fit the headline of the article but also seems to be much better reporting than the article itself presents. :|
In the early 2000s the only ones of those we got at my state school were: kiosks for posters in common space on campus + minifridge rentals + rug sale kiosks. Definitely a LOT more spartan.
I really don't understand why they were compelled to make their own language.