Is it really Apple's font? I believe WhatsApp on Android uses the same. I guess everyone identifies them as Apple's because WhatsApp is not popular in US. I find it way uglier than Google's, too much detail makes them unusable at small sizes.
Anyway I find emoji worsen the communication. There was a time where I could just use :) when I was smiling and :D when really laughing. Now there's so much different smiling variants that you have to use at least 3 laughing-with-tears to convey even a little amount of joy so the other side doesn't think you're just dismissing them with a normal non-laughing smile.
PS what's going on with scrolling in the second link?
Yes, it is Apple's artwork. While Apple might have licensed it to some third parties, I'm more inclined to believe that they turn a blind eye to others using it 'inappropriately' because it still plays in their favour.
I agree, legal or not, I very much rely on other drivers "signals" when driving. Over the years you learn to predict what the driver in front of you would do in a normal situation and adjust your driving in advance. I'm still able to break on emergency but when you can clearly see way ahead of the car in front there is no obstacle and yet they still brake it's extremely risky and frustrating. Young drivers here usually mark the car some way to warn you to be super aware of their unexpected behavior, I'd expect self driving cars would to the same.
It means that you would have been surprised if the jogger was making a jump to her left (avoiding hole in her path for example), forcing any driver to hit the brake.
I wish there were some external visual cue like a light or something to indicate a car is using autopilot. That way you could give them a wider buffer.
Instead of relying on other drivers' signals, you could instead use them as extra warning, and instead of driving so close to them you're putting yourself and them and potentially others in danger if they brake when you didn't expect, you could back off to a safe distance.
Well, not sure where you read I drive close to anyone. What I'm trying to say is that erratic drivers are dangerous because you learn to predict what a normal driver would do in a typical situation (e.g. jogger too close to the lane => slow down to a safe speed and navigate towards the center).
If a self driving car doesn't reproduce the most common driving style the other drivers should be extra careful around it, some kind of mark on the outside could help.
As others have said, I would go with simulated annealing, or any non convex optimization algorithm you're more comfortable with.
But first I'd investigate what's really the gain of closely packing the candies. Would shipment costs increase with a bigger non completely filled box? wouldn't a non rigid bag be better? Do non closely packed candies get damaged with shipment? Do customers prefer closely packed candies?
I mean, let's say you get good enough local optimum configurations, then you have to exactly follow them packing the candies one by one... wouldn't it be easier to throw everything in a bigger bag and ship that?
There's something minimalistic and artful in trying to come up with the smallest packaging possible, which will probably appeal to the same people who enjoy Japanese candy, and Japanese culture in general.
And it doubles up as a 3D puzzle for the user! Take everything out and try to put them all back in. And if you can't, just eat some of the candies to make it easier to solve.
This is one of those things that 99% of customers will not notice. Some small percentage may prefer the closely-packed box over the bag but not be able to articular why.
And some very small percentage will see it, recognize the difficulty in continuously doing something like this over the "throw it in a bag and ship the bag" approach, and think it's amazing. Those are the fans that will repost your stuff, talk about you to others, etc.
This type of stuff is what creates the "1" in the 90-9-1 split.
They do expire but you don't have to take a new drive test. It's more about periodically checking you're still physically fit to drive (e.g. you need to take a mandatory eyesight test every few years).
GStreamer is highly modular, so it makes totally sense to ship a set of plugins with subpar code, unclear patent/licensing, barely maintained in a dedicated package. They called it "bad", what do you expect?
The issue here is that distributions should offer more granularity with on demand codec installation. Does it make sense that to play an mp3 (not that sure this is the case) I get also the NSF decoder?
No idea, I don't use ubuntu. According to OP it's pulled by default in 12.04 and 14.04 as long as you choose to enable multimedia codecs at install time.
> Where there is no ground pin, North American power supplies must meet UL1310/CSA No.223
So, as far as I can tell, with a brief skim of the standard, a class 2 device should have no more than 0.5 mA leakage current, right?
I just measured the leakage from my macbookpro through my body to ground and it's about 50 μA. Well within the limits.
So I guess that's why they never did anything about it. Still amazing that you can clearly feel this current: if you lightly brush your wrist around the sharp edges it actually hurts. I wonder how 500 μA would feel.
Depends on the 'bandwidth' of the signal and the test equipment and the individual. Generally consider many non-medical measurements below 025mA suspect, as few design engineers make an effort to understand the various frequency components of the voltage and current leakage signals, and/or understand the effects to the signal of instrument impedances.
Have had several discussions with Mr.Pete Perkins (he sits on several STCs and has written several IEEE papers) on this subject, and we agree that the human body model referenced by these safety standards being used for the measurement network (IEC60990) have problems because the medical community does not understand physics. As the various standards committees continue to look at the body of work being done by bioengineers, will probably see better measurement methods being codified.
Human response and perception to electricity has significant variance and resultant effects/affects. My wife can detect less than 10uA at 200Hz/42V. My detection threshold is at least an order of magnitude greater, even at 50Hz.
Class 2 (arabic numeral) is for limited power sources, regardless of construction class.
Class II (roman numeral) indicates a construction class where safety cannot be dependent on a ground bond.
Class I (roman numeral) indicates safety is dependent on a reliable ground bound.
Class I equipment, depending on the scoped end-use equipment safety standard, can have up to 25mA of leakage.
Class II equipment, depending on the end-use environment, can be limited to 0.25mA of available touch leakage.
A good reference for Class 2 and 3 equipment is the UL5085-x series (same as CSA No66.x).
For the EU, there are no harmonized standards in the Low Voltage Directive that have an equivalent Class 2/3 construction, although there are several safety standards that address requirements for 'inherently limited' power sources.
About reversed hot/neutral. We have these[1] symmetrical adapters in Europe. How are you supposed to know the proper orientation? You are not. Because you either have an earthed metal case or you have a double insulated device.
My magsafe adapters have a "double insulation" symbol, a tiny tiny one near "UL Japan", but still need a earthed prong to not feel any shock from the laptop metal case.
connect the two prong adapter, take your shoes and socks off, feet on the ground... feel the vibe! the best shocks you get at the edges or at the pointy edges in that groove to lift the display up.
I definitely experience it a lot with math. I think the way we learn and "write" math is somewhat different from how our brain does it. So you need to give it a bit of time to translate everything to its language and back to the formalism we use.
Sometimes I feel like a problem is way easier in unconscious space, like I'm sure solution is there, I can almost see it but it needs time to encode it in the much slower conscious form.
Anyway I find emoji worsen the communication. There was a time where I could just use :) when I was smiling and :D when really laughing. Now there's so much different smiling variants that you have to use at least 3 laughing-with-tears to convey even a little amount of joy so the other side doesn't think you're just dismissing them with a normal non-laughing smile.
PS what's going on with scrolling in the second link?