I wonder if there is a quiet army of iOS/Swift/other developers who want to contribute to OSS projects by writing documentation and READMEs instead of writing code… if so, if you are or know someone like this, hmu!
Actual headline in an op-ed from the Miami Herald today: “In the Wake of the Douglas High Massacre, Is Home Schooling a Better Option?” That’s how ridiculous our situation has become. People are starting to question whether the problem is with sending kids to school, not with pervasive access to military weapons.
From 1888, when law review articles first were indexed, through
1959, every single one on the Second Amendment concluded it did
not guarantee an individual right to a gun. The first to argue
otherwise, written by a William and Mary law student named Stuart
R. Hays, appeared in 1960. He began by citing an article in the
NRA’s American Rifleman magazine and argued that the amendment
enforced a “right of revolution,” of which the Southern states
availed themselves during what the author called “The War Between
At first, only a few articles echoed that view. Then, starting in
the late 1970s, a squad of attorneys and professors began to churn
out law review submissions, dozens of them, at a prodigious rate.
Funds — much of them from the NRA — flowed freely. An essay
contest, grants to write book reviews, the creation of “Academics
for the Second Amendment,” all followed. In 2003, the NRA
Foundation provided $1 million to endow the Patrick Henry
professorship in constitutional law and the Second Amendment at
George Mason University Law School.
This fusillade of scholarship and pseudo-scholarship insisted that
the traditional view — shared by courts and historians — was
wrong. There had been a colossal constitutional mistake. Two
centuries of legal consensus, they argued, must be overturned.
We don’t need to repeal the 2nd Amendment — although I think we should, insofar as it is inexplicably ambiguously written and punctuated — we just need to flip the Supreme Court to interpret it as it had been from 1789 through 2008.
Any attempt to “Hey Siri” another device is met by a loud interruption by Siri either of the music, or of the silence of the room. It’s bad enough that it assumes all requests are being made to it, but it’s even worse that it insists on chiming in even when it isn’t capable of serving the request. Just to remind everybody that it’s not configured for personal requests.
Funny enough, just a few moments before I read Daniel’s post I had my first experience of the iPhone fielding a “Hey Siri” request instead of the HomePod, even though both were only a foot or so away from me on my desk.
But Daniel’s experiences overall mesh with some of my first observations. In particular the “Siri is Siri” point: I like Apple’s virtual assistant well enough, but some of the holes in its functionality are baffling. Daniel calls out not being able to set separate timers, which is definitely annoying—to that I’ll add that Siri on the HomePod can’t tell me anything about my calendar, which is kind of puzzling.
Seeing what decisions Apple makes about the future of the HomePod seems like it might be the most interesting part of the device’s story. In particular, I’m hoping this drives significant attention to Siri—the company can get by without making too many changes to it when it’s just an ancillary interface, as it is on all of Apple’s other devices, but when it’s as central as it with the HomePod, well, that’s a different story.
Earlier this week the European Parliament voted 384 to 153 to review whether Daylight Saving Time is actually worth it. Although the resolution it voted on was non-binding, the majority reflected a growing dissatisfaction with a system that has been used by the US, Canada, most of Europe, and regions in Asia, Africa, and South America for decades.
The resolution asked the European Commission to review the costs and benefits of Daylight Saving Time. If the EU were to abolish Daylight Saving Time, it would need approval of the majority of EU member states and EU Parliament members.
Last week's vote to reconsider seasonal time change was proposed after 70,000 Finnish citizens signed a petition to end Daylight Saving Time, according to German-based international broadcaster Deutsche Welle. Ireland Member of European Parliament (MEP) Sean Kelly has been working to stop time changes as well.
"We think that there's no need to change the clocks," Kelly said to Deutsche Welle. "It came in during World War One, it was supposed to be for energy savings—the indications are that there are very few energy savings, if any—and there are an awful lot of disadvantages to both human beings and animals that make it outdated at this point."
The claim that setting clocks an hour ahead in spring doesn't save energy or make societies safer is often used by Daylight Saving opponents. In the past, when lighting a home was the primary driver of electricity consumption, adjusting clocks to take advantage of late-evening sunlight might have made a dent in that consumption. But in today's world, air conditioning and electronics are also significant portions of electricity demand, and optimizing business hours to coincide with daylight hours doesn't significantly impact that draw of electricity.
On the other hand, an extra hour of daylight in the evening is often good for tourism-dependent industries. Deutsche Welle wrote that EU Transport Commissioner Violeta Bulc said regardless of how the EU proceeds, it's important that the whole European Economic Area stay on the same page.
Still, it seems that choosing whether to stick with winter time or summer time is key in a transition away from Daylight Saving Time. Years ago, Russia tried to go on permanent summer time, but changed to permanent winter time in 2014 after the summer-time-in-winter change gave people stress and health problems when it stayed darker for longer during winter mornings, according to the BBC.