That sounds very similar to hiding behind sneaky talk in order to keep the practical effects in the background.
Almost no-one cares about the terms "Manifest v2 extensions" - because almost no one recognizes them for what they really are. Most people can understand it by its effect - that it will disable UBO. Only sneaky people will insist on using the technically correct, but obscure term in a PUBLIC announcement - clearly the aim is to make sure that the public overlooks the announcement.
> backed it up with a kangaroo court of 1 or 2 buddies weighing in on the Talk page
If they had a couple of other editors backing them up, then it doesn't sound all that "jumped up" to me. Sounds more like you are playing with a different set of rules in mind.
What are you talking about... the audio might not professional studio level 10/10, but I don't see anything significantly wrong with it - given that its more like a standard presentation mic. Its clearly good enough.
Every time he turns away from the mic and continues talking while looking at the projection his volume goes way down and at best sounds like a mumble. It is very taxing to keep up with him when he's turned away. It's the wrong mic for the task.
Not the poster, but when I actively think about it, I use common sense, ask for clarification, use some imagination, and a reasonable margin of error (imo). Then I try to judge the situation/reaction.
Without that, the word overreaction is meaningless.
Seriously, though, I think some of it is that Google is a little more transparent. They ingest tremendous amounts of data about you, but for the most part it's while you do things you would otherwise do. Facebook is a destination, an environment unto itself, and it's impossible to ignore that it's addictive and sucking you in over and over. So you use it, but hate it all the same because it has too much power.
I've looked at the data Google collects on me, and it's probably more frightening than what FB has managed to gather. Google has all my search queries to look at, every place I've driven, etc. All without me really noticing.
This Pulitzer prize winning book proves the adage "Truth is stranger than fiction". Surprisingly, you don't need to know any math or much of physics / chemistry to read this one.
It is the story of one of the most amazing achievements of human kind and its more engaging than all the Dan Brown novels put together. This is no exaggeration - the book will entertain, educate and enlighten you like no other book you have ever read.
About this book, David Eisenberg wrote thus on his blog...
> The Making of the Atomic Bomb is not only the best and most comprehensive treatment of the [Manhattan] project and its antecedents (and I’ve read a number of them), it is also possibly the single best history or non-fiction book that I have ever read, and that’s a lot of books.
> Of course, it is not for everyone. If you don’t like history or science (don’t panic, no math necessary), World War II stories, daring commando raids, hair raising escapes, behind the scene politics, mysterious conversations, intellectual battles between the world's greatest scientists, between scientists and soldiers, scientists and politicians, the interpersonal relationships of the great men of this century, incomparable drama, massive death, powerful explosions, personal sacrifice and “a ripping good yarn” as they used to say, then don’t read it. If you are interested, I promise you that there will be no disappointment.
> a person can continue to be happy and have a meaningful life after going through an experience of losing everything
The life of a person who has lost everything is very different from a person who didn't have much in the first place. Whether it should be different or not can be discussed, but the reality for most people is that the 2 cases are very different.
Regret and despair are very real and play a vital role in life after a big loss.
I believe you and your parent commenter don't agree because you seem to be trivializing the issue a bit - in a way similar to how people who haven't been through big loss, or feel that because they got through it fine, so everyone else should also be able to do it as easily.
It ignores the inherently different way in which people deal with such circumstances.
> You have the power to not let your feelings be determined by external events.
There are smart people who are unable to exert enough control over their feelings (even when they know the above idea). People are diverse and often biologically (or culturally or both) wired differently, and people who are a little lucky in the ability to handle such situations better often find it easy to wonder "how idiotic can the person be to commit suicide on losing everything" - just because they handle it better.
ps: About people being wired differently, it is easy to see in certain aspects. Some people tend to panic more than others, and then there are those who have panic attacks under pressure. Then there are those who have an inherent bias towards one of either fight or flight.
I agree about variance in disposition, but I would suggest that everyone cultivate the ability to cope with big losses, because we're all going to lose everything important to us eventually.
It's necessary to experience serious adversity and setbacks early and often, so that when the "big one(s)" come, your psyche can deal with it.
Feel free to skip this, but I always liked the joke about the pig with a wooden leg.
A traveling salesman stops at a farm and sees a pig sitting on the porch with a wooden leg. He asks the farmer about it, and the farmer replies "Well, that's a very special pig. A few years ago, a tornado came through these parts, and he warned us in time to get down to the basement - saved all our lives." "OK," says the salesman, "but why does he have a wooden leg?" The farmer goes on to recount how the pig once saved the farm from a wildfire, and about the time his wife was in a difficult childbirth, and the pig ran across the street to get help from the neighbors.
"I understand how you feel about the pig," the salesman says, "but why the wooden leg?" "Well," says the farmer, "a pig that special, you can't bear to eat him all at once."
I have lived in New Delhi for 20 years, in Singapore for 5 years and in SF/Berkeley for 10 years.
Public transit in SF Bay area is horrible. You are right... it smells because of the homeless riding it all day, and service times are bad, and its quite expensive too.
Even New Delhi's metro is nicer and cleaner than the BART / Caltrain (because its newer but also because the company keeps it clean).
Singapore's public transit system is out of this world. Its absolutely amazing. Clean, efficient, reasonably priced, etc.
It was a shock to me when I landed in the "greatest country on earth" to see such a pathetic public transport systems.
I brought a motorcycle after my first year in US. We have 2 cars now, not only because we like the cars, but precisely because we would like to avoid the public transport.
However, people who have seen good public transport would always vote for that. I would love to see a Singapore like public transport in the US. I loved it and would give up 1 of our cars for that (still need 1 car to head out to Yosemite). But alas, I don't see that happening in the US because US people have not seen good public transport.
Almost no-one cares about the terms "Manifest v2 extensions" - because almost no one recognizes them for what they really are. Most people can understand it by its effect - that it will disable UBO. Only sneaky people will insist on using the technically correct, but obscure term in a PUBLIC announcement - clearly the aim is to make sure that the public overlooks the announcement.