its not global so much as prosperity-trap nations, there's enough of those these days (c.f. China) that it lets you say that generally globally, its true
There were predictions 10+ years ago that illustrated this _global_ trend. One stuck with me in particular, I might of found it through /. or Ars, not sure can't find the exact paper. But it predicted all but a handful of nations would be at or below replacement rates by 2050. It was spattering of African countries and Yemen. I think there was one another non African country but it escapes me. It stuck with me because I scoffed at the idea, yet every year and now seemingly every week we see more and more data that shows we are quickly lining up with that prediction.
I don't think we'll be able to navigate this decline with any semblance of grace. Not with the state of our culture and politics. We'll see tremendous instability leading to further erosion of rights, we'll see wealth inequality skyrocket... I mean we are barely even talking about the birth rate issue let alone at a point where we could perhaps have strategies to confront this rapidly approaching future.
"Police bad" doesn't account for differences in performance between SF police and others. "DA bad" at least tries to do this (although as you note, is in some tension with the facts).
Sure, DA may not be the major issue on a fully objective level. But his point that "police suck" does not explain why SFPD is so bad relative to other cities still stands. If it's purely a police force problem, what makes SF police different? Genuinely curious if anyone has theories about this besides DA.
Your statement about Dugin is false---I (in the U.S., to be clear) was able to buy a copy of one book on BooksAMillion, and it looks like most/all of them are still available.
Of course, it is true that his books are unavailable on Amazon and Amazon-owned sites. I wish I knew what caused this, or how to find out.
I believe it's in Vertigo Park And Other Tall Tales by Mark O'Donnell but it's appeared in the Spy magazine December 1987 before that.
If you search Google Books for "Do you not be happy with me as the translator of the books of you" and click on the Preview or Full View button you should see it in several places
You and I have very different experiences. At the places where I've been a student and worked, it was possible and permitted to enter the vast majority of buildings (I think all academic buildings, but I'm hedging with "vast majority"), during working hours (something like 8am to 6pm), without any identification or permission. Importantly, this always includes libraries.
I know people who, when considering faculty job offers from universities, use "are libraries open to the public" as a proxy for other valuable properties of the university. It seems like a pretty good heuristic to me.
I've been asked for ID exactly once on a university campus---I needed security to let me into my office building in the middle of the night because I'd forgotten my wallet in there, and they needed to record my name for some record. The officer didn't seem interested in _checking_ the ID so much as copying down the name.
I would be surprised if this were true for MIT libraries, it certainly is not for Harvard. Otherwise, many academic buildings were open. But not libraries because tourists would be disruptive.
MIT's openness is a huge wedge issue in the Harvard-MIT culture wars. That sounds like stupid elitist junk, but makes since historically. MIT wasn't always... "MIT". Not too long ago, it was just another college. Its open culture combined with proximity to austere academic/government/private institutions is one of the two reasons that it grew to be the behemoth is it now. The literal openness to the public has long been a huge source of "soft power" for MIT.
(The other reason for MIT's rise being WW2 and the military-industrial-academic complex ofc)
Even with this topic set aside, MIT has been turning into just another Harvard, which is a real shame. MIT alum used to be very proud of the fact that any and all were welcome to participate in many aspects of campus life.
the other other reason for MIT's rise was its acceptance of Jewish scientists fleeing Germany in the pre WWII period, while the ivy league schools* still had (anti) Jewish quotas.
also, MIT was not a complete slouch before that, as Harvard proposed absorbing MIT in the early part of the 20th century.
* which weren't technically ivy league yet, that league being found in 1954
Interesting. My own alma mater UCL was founded on openness to women
and Jews and has thrived on that ticket of inclusivity. It was early
to the table in admitting overseas students when most UK universities
only recruited provincially.
When visiting central London I sometimes feel like a walk around the
Gower Street quad, and seem able to mooch about the campus and poke my
head into familiar lecture halls - even though it's central London
location would seem to make theft/vandalism a threat.
I think a lot of this physical security lockdown nonsense is
post-pandemic culture, and obviously the profitability of "security
industries"
pre-covid, you could go into MIT libraries as a member of the public. This was well known in Cambridge exactly because it was in stark contrast to the policy for Harvard libraries. You also could get on the wifi and access all the journals MIT had electronic access to.
The MIT library is open to anyone who can get into the cluster of buildings that contains it (along with the main building, the infinite corridors, math and CS and many other disciplines). You won't be able to check out books if you aren't from MIT, but you can stroll and read and scan at your pleasure.
Public libraries allow anyone in -- BPL for example. I used to study there all the time, but I didn't think it was that disruptive. This is just one opinion but I actually really like this as a heuristic and will probably use it myself. Libraries should be open to all!
Your experience matches mine, except for the libraries. In my experience at 3 private eastern US universities (two ivy leagues and one liberal arts), all libraries required university IDs or a pass to enter beyond the lobby. I do not know what was required for a non-university person to obtain a pass.
I don't understand the relevance of this. The claim is about what "half of Russia thinks". Why would propaganda in Africa have a strong effect on the thought of those in Russia?
This is a bit of a non-sequitur (not to mention silly), but I'm curious about the details. Do you have any links to this story of Rabi refusing to let Bader study part-time?
The problem, of course, it that the timing doesn't make sense at all. You say this happened in the early 50's. That can't be the early 1850's, since Bader wasn't born yet. But by the 1950s, Feynman was already long gone from high school. Indeed, he'd already devised path integrals, and so he certainly knew about the principle of least action!
You’re right somewhere in here. I’m certainly wrong about the 50’s. Columbia was a bastion of antisemitism until the 70’s, it had the world’s best Physics Dept. for a long time, but frittered it away. Meanwhile, Cornell built a world-class research university, partly on Columbia’s leavings.
I'm baffled. Is there some broader context that makes this make sense? From what I can tell, this fellow (the one sending the email) is being paid money to develop priorities for updating the FreeBSD handbook. His response is to send an email to the /announcement/ mailing list, with a list of all the relevant bug reports he could find, asking others to do his job for him?
A reasonable survey to send around might be "how often do you use the FreeBSD docs?" "How often do you notice errors in section 1? Section 2? Section 3?" That's not what this is. It's "here's a specific error, and I'm gonna run a /poll/ to figure out what the priority on fixing it is".
Even ignoring the "that's why we hired /you/" component---this must be a singularly ineffective way to gain reliable information. Very few people are going to reply (because each of the ~100 questions is rather technical!). The responses are therefore going to be self-selected to... I don't know, whoever has the time and will to waste on this.
What is also baffling is the new state of the FreeBSD Handbook. I am a newcomer, so my voice probably doesn't matter much - I've been running FreeBSD since 9 as my primary desktop. The Handbook was a neat collection of formatted HTML pages. The contents section was where you'd expect it - at the top. Typography, code colors, vertical and horizontal indents were all well-thought - it was easy to find the stuff you need fast. The person(s) who made it were concentrated on delivering information.
The new Handbook is really bad. The contents in split HTMLs is on the left, but then there is another contents section on the right. There contents in single HTML is on the right (why?) Typography is a weak mix of serif and sans-serif and italics in illogical places. Interline spacing is bad - the feeling is that instead of a reference book we are now looking at a poorly designed advertisemsent brochure, but still structured as a book. Chapters, sections and subsections are poorly demarcated - you can't tell when things end and new things begin. Horizontal and vertical indents separating coherent blocks of text are all broken - you simply can't easily find the information you need.
Maybe I'm an old fart, and I like Beastie more than this soul-less flat demon, but I think the new person in charge of the Handbook is concentrated on "design" more than on the content. Sorry for the off-topic, fellas. Just needed to get it out.
Sorry for the delay, I'm gonna answer my previous post :)
First of all, thanks for your feedback. I'm gonna try to answer all of your questions. I also got some emails about this and I'll ping you requesting your opinion about some changes I planned to improve the usability. Again, thanks for your feedback and to get in touch with me.
First of all, I didn't notice this complaint in Discord. I'm in the FreeBSD forums, the FreeBSD mailing list, IRC, and some telegram channels, but I wasn't in Discord. Right now I am in Discord. The truth is that there's plenty of ways to communicate with us (the developers) and we cannot stay in touch in every place, sorry. But I was informed about the usability problems in the FreeBSD Forums. Right now I'm working in a way to hide the book menu and the table of contents menu. If it's taken me so long to get to work on these problems it's because I do this in my spare time. Sometimes I have more free time and sometimes not. This last month I haven't had any free time because we're developing a new tool at my work and this takes a lot of time. I'm the main architect and you know... (of course using only FreeBSD ;)
Secondly, nobody paid me for the new design and nobody paid me to migrate the documentation to Hugo/AsciiDoctor. I've made it because I'm a FreeBSD user and I thought this is some kind of "contribute to something that I'm using in my personal laptop and at my job for free". So basically, I made this for free. And I'm really proud to belong to the FreeBSD Community and to dedicate my free time to this operating system.
Apart from that, we're also working on a new design for the main page and also a new page for the manual pages and for the ports.
And right now the regarding questions about the new design.
* The left side of the page:
What you can see on the left side are all the chapters of the book. In the old design, if you're for example in the second chapter and you want to go to the ninth chapter you have two options. First, go to the index (one navigation in the browser) and find the ninth chapter in the index and click to this chapter (another navigation in the browser). Right now you have all the chapters on the left side. I think this is an improvement. I am working on a search tool to search in the chapter titles and filter them.
* The right side of the page:
What you can see on the right side of the page it's the Table of Contents of the chapter. In the old design, if you are in the middle of the page and you want to navigate to another section of this same page, you have two options. First, go to the top of the page to locate the Table of Contents and click on the desired chapted. Second, use the scroll to navigate to the desired section. Right now you have all the chapters always on your screen. (As I said, I am working on a way to hide this ToC). Apart from that, on the right side you can see an easy way to download the book or the article in PDF (we're working in the epub format). You don't need to navigate to the FreeBSD FTP, etc. You have the PDF in one click and in an easy way to get it. And if you want to edit the page because you found an error. You can press the link and modify the page. In this way we want to encourage people to contribute to FreeBSD.
> Typography is a weak mix of serif and sans-serif and italics in illogical places.
About the font. All the portal is using the Inter font and mono font for the command examples. In the old design it's true that we're not using Inter but we're using the same font for the commands examples.
Can you please share a place in which you think italic should not be used? Maybe it was a mistake in the conversion to AsciiDoc.
I know that changes are hard. In the end we're humans and we like what we are accustomed to. If some of you have been using FreeBSD since version 9 and reading the manual for 7 or 8 years it is normal that this change is difficult.
And about the topic of this thread :)
I'm really happy to see this kind of initiative. It is very good that someone lifts the rug and brings out all the improvements that can be done in documentation. And it's a really good initiative.
If some of you want to collaborate with the documentation. Please, don't hesitate to contact me by email.
Bye and thanks again for your feedback. I'll answer the emails ASAP.
Thanks for reaching out. Not sure if we should continue here or via e-mail. If the new design was approved by the FreeBSD community then what say do I really have in all this? I am conservative. I am sure many will disagree with me. I type this on a 101-key Austin PC/AT keyboard. I think iPhone 4 was the best of all, that Mac OS X peaked at Snow Leopard, Apple is going backwards in terms of UI, and I'd rather see computer screens going back to 4:3. I like old music. I hate touch screens and non-tactile switches in cars with a passion. I am convinced that many modern design decisions are actually harmful. I'd rather live with as little design as possible.
Sorry, back to the new Handbook...
1. I don't like that contents are separated in two panes on both sides of the main content. I think this is a harmful decision. First, you are left with space too narrow for the main content. This reminds me of 2010s web magazine/news sites designs where 50% of the screen is wasted for ads and the main content is just a single narrow column of text. Next step here is that this narrow column forces you to split your text into shorter and shorter paragraphs to remain readable, until you realize each sentence ends up on its own paragraph like we're serving people with attention disorder. I don't think this is the right format for a book. We are not trying to grab attention here. Design should disappear and let user do his stuff.
2. Table of contents should be at one place. It's really strange that you click on a topic in the left pane, and then an update happens on the right pane all the way across the main text, but the context for both panes is the same - providing user with a ToC. Also, the right pane is called "Table of Contents" but it's ToC for the current chapter only, not for the entire book. Then you have "Book chapters" on the left - is this the full ToC? (Should "chapters" be capitalized?) I very much prefer the old system with just one ToC at the beginning of the book, as in all the books we read, or ToCs appearing at the beginning of the chapters. They shouldn't be all the time on the screen, pretty much like you don't have a ToC hanging out of your reference book all the time while you're reading it. It's not a brochure!
3. I don't like complex CSS getting involved at all. The less CSS/JS, the better. I appreciated Handbook being a simple HTML. I hate when web pages begin to hide elements, or things begin to slide, fold and unfold, text moving on the screen, and so on. I am here to read the book, learn things and do my stuff in the other window. Please make everything as static as possible. The less the UI interferes with my reading process, the better. This includes the two ToC panes that are scrollable. It's like reading a book with some kind of inserts. Do we really need the "top" button at the bottom of the page? Why would want to clutter our screen with that button if there's a Home button on the keyboard? Are you optimizing for tablets and phones? But most mobile devices can scroll back to the top, at least iOS can. We don't need another element here.
4. Interline spacing is not for a book - too much space between lines. Is that 1.15 or 1.2? I'd go back to the old format. The font is gray - why are we loosing contrast, what for? The font doesn't match the web site. Not sure which "portal" you are referring to. The hyperlinks are not underlined, why? I also think there should be a little vertical indent between paragraphs.
5. It will take me a really long time to sip through all the italics. Quick example: paragraph 2.2. Architectures are in bold italics. I can understand bold here, but why italics? Although I'd make bold a little less pronounced. It really screams.
6. The code snippet background color, e.g. paragraph 4.3.1. It was a pleasant almond in the old book. Now the background is black. You are inverting from grey text on white all the way to white text on black. My eyes are crying - why? I guess this was a simulation of a terminal window, but not all terminals are black. This inversion breaks the coherence.
7. Chapter/section/subseciton titles were dark red in the old book, which helped to "unglue" different subjects vertically, especially in a single HTML. Now they're all grey. There's a barely visible (actually to the point of irritation!) horizontal underlining in chapter titles, but as it's an underline it actually contributes to the vertical clutter.
8. Filenames were green in the old book, and now they are grey, but not only that - they're extremely bold. This one is controversial, but I really dislike jumping to that much bold in the main content - I think it interferes with attention and makes the text look incoherent, as bolded out filenames stand out from the rest of the text. With that much bold, and especially with main text being a subtle grey, filenames really grab too much attention and even compete with chapter titles.
9. Warning and note section titles are in the serif font. Why suddenly serif here? Don't get me wrong, I really like serif. I would switch FreeBSD all the way back to serif, I think it was really cool, different and, most important, pleasant for the eyes and easy to read. It showed that FreeBSD is not always chasing for the bleeding edge and that UNIX traditions are valued. But if we are switching everything to sans serif now so badly, then why this sudden move? We need a typographer here.
The discord community seems acutely aware of this. When I first became acquainted with the system last year I made an effort to document my confusion when hitting roadblocks after reading the handbook to them, and most of them came down to usability issues with the implementation of the pages. The response was always the same "we know, and thanks for the report."
That's the equivalent of "we'll get back to you". If they know and not doing anything about it they're not doing their job.
That's not so bad for a free project but if they pay someone to do it that sounds like a bigger problem.
Edit: In reply to the comment below which I can't reply to: Someone else mentioned the person doing the server was being paid for the work on the handbook.
You should be aware that "their job" is probably not the right term. FreeBSD is developed (mostly, technically) by volunteers and you can't make them do things you want. If you won't step up to do it, it's little unfair to demand others to do it for you.
Please don't post this low-effort nonsense. If you cared about the object-level question, you can check easily enough: https://www.whois.com/whois/orwell.ru. (Spoiler: no, not using namecheap.)
Really, this is a transparent attempt to bring that topic into unrelated threads. Let the namecheap-bashing stay in the namecheap-bashing threads.
I think it is relevant because it shows how this content can be affected by it. I think you will agree how this is not something that should be off the internet, Animal Farm is more relevant then ever.
