Counterpoint: Dice is terrible. Sure it makes sense for bigger artist that will sold out, but for most it is not necessary and it forces you :
- To have a smartphone
- To give out your phone number
- To create an account
The worst? You can't even resale the ticket if the event is not sold out! Usually if I'm unable to attend a concert, I'll put my ticket up for sale for half the price, but with Dice, you just wasted money on empty seats. Great.
Dice say that if someone wants to be able to purchase your ticket then you can sell it to them via their platform at no cost to you. i.e. you can return your ticket if someone wants it.
I do not know of any ticket that can be returned "just because".
Even a theatre or opera will accept returns only if they have demand for them.
Now compare to the majority of platforms that don't allow returns even when there is demand for them... or that will charge late arriving fans a higher price than face value for the returned tickets.
If the service you are proxying offers authentication based on token within cookies, does that mean that you will have access to tokens hosted on the client side? Should you disclose a potential security risk to them (same for credentials interception)?
Kind of reminded me of the traditional wisdom that you should select chains and sprocket to avoid patterned wear. I don't know if there is an effect (especially with bikes and their low torque),but I always think about it when changing my chain. I suppose this only applies to single sprocket bike.
This is called "hunting tooth". It applies to any system of gears or timing belts.
In gears, if you make sure the number of teeth of mating gears is coprime then you wear the teeth of one gear evenly against the other gear. If there are low factors, then each tooth of one gear only engages with a small number of teeth on the other gear, exacerbating wear.
With belts, if the number of teeth on the belt shares low factors with the number of teeth on either of the pulleys then you get the same effect: any given tooth on the belt only ever meshes with a small number of teeth on the pulley.
Isn't this only relevant for fixed gear bikes, where you can skid the rear wheel to brake, and you want maximize the number of possible "skid patches", or orientations of the rear wheel while the pedals are in a fixed position?
It could also apply to the wear on the chainring and cog if their teeth are in a perfect proportion to one another, but without thinking too hard about it, I'm guessing that's actually rare. For instance a 2:1 ratio would be awkward for most cyclists riding on pavement (too low) and 3:1 too high, if they had to choose exactly one ratio.
I ride 46:19, because those are the parts that were in my bin when I built the bike, and it's a pretty good all-round ratio for city riding unless you're a lot more athletic than I am.
Also, those components wear out soon enough anyway -- a chain lasts 2 to 3 thousand miles, and a cog lasts a few chains.
It applies to any bike. Ideally the number of links in the chain would be coprime to the number of teeth on every sprocket. The easiest way to achieve this is to make the number of links in the chain prime.
It'll still work just fine if you ignore this idea, but it might wear out more quickly. If you're a hobbyist just trying to make something work, you can safely ignore it and do whatever is most convenient. If you're a bicycle engineer trying to make things reliable and long-lasting, then there's no downside to making the number of links prime if you can arrange it.
I don't know whether bike companies actually do choose prime-numbered chains, maybe they have other constraints that are more important.
On a bike with derailleur gears, every time you change gears the derailleur will add some slippage so you won't get this effect.
> The easiest way to achieve this is to make the number of links in the chain prime
The chainring is fixed, but you might need to add or remove a link in the chain. In practice it seems more common to make the chainring have a prime number of teeth (53 or 47).
> then there's no downside to making the number of links prime if you can arrange it.
Bike chains always have to have an even number of links because they come in inner and outer pairs. But this has an effect on chainrings as well. When the tooth on a chainring or sprocket is in between two inner plates it's in a narrow gap. When the tooth is in between outer plates that's a wide gap. If you have a chainring with an even number of teeth then you can have the teeth match the narrow and wide profiles (called a narrow-wide chainring) which is supposed to make it less likely that you drop your chain off the chainrings. I'm not sure if it works, tbh. It seems to only be a thing in mountain or gravel bikes with a single chainring. I can't find any track chainrings that have the profile but I only looked for a second.
For chains themselves there's usually a pretty narrow number of links that work on a road drivetrain. I think I can live with one fewer or more pair of links on mine.
Track chainrings don't need a narrow-wide profile because there's very little slack in the system for the chain to come off. Saint Sheldon warns of the possibility of losing a finger also for this reason.
Yeah, chains and cassettes are considered wear items, so I doubt manufacturers put much thought into patterned wear. Avoiding chain drop and crisp shifting are higher priorities.
A recent ruling (namely the Schrems II one) makes it very complicated to host and process data in countries that we used to consider as having "equivalent" privacy protection. The most prominent of course is the USA, but the UK could be on the line at some point.
For now it has an "adequacy decision"[1] allowing such transfer, but future changes could threaten that, and activist such as Max Schrems would happily (and rightfully) attack this decision if it happened.
Schrems II might be a blessing in disguise for the European hosting/Saas/Cloud industry, we'll see !
I think the UK will be fine for a while because they still enforce their implementation of the GDPR. Once those laws change, though, I'd definitely avoid storing or processing any data over there.
I don't think the UK has that much to offer in terms of cloud and storage. All the big brands are in continental Europe or Ireland. The real impact would more likely be that externalised services that some European businesses contract dedicated companies in the UK for (payroll, data analysis, marketing, insurance, etc.) could suddenly become a subject to strict privacy rules that would make it impossible to continue if the UK were to be dropped of the whitelist.
It's usually not a good idea to tune a guitar as you described. Basically a guitar has to use "temperate tuning" because it has frets, so you can't be absolutely in tune everywhere, but you can minimize the error on each position. So if you tune string by string relying on fretting the last string, you will "carry" the error, and the resulting tuning will be wrong. It is good for a first pass, but you then want to check that some specific positions do sound good. Depending on what you are playing (for example if you rely more on some open chord position), you might even want to tune the open string to make those position sound especially good (at the expense of some less common one). That is commonly referred to as "sweetened tuning".
EDIT: I might have confused things indeed. If you fret, you should not carry the error. Usually, an practical way to tune two string is to play harmonics and listen to the "beats" between them. That will carry the error. Fretting should work, but in practice does not really because that suppose that your intonation is perfect (ie the fret are perfectly placed), which they usually are not, especially on acoustics with no easy way to set it up.
That's very interesting. The tuning for a violin is always (afaik) to make the open strings a perfect 3/2 fifth apart, but then of course you can play to whatever tuning you want. (If you have the skill to do that - I certainly don't!)
That makes tuning a guitar a much more complex thing in principle, with choices and trade-offs to be made, so maybe that's a better explanation for the prevalence of tuners.
I say "always" (for the violin), but that has problems itself. Eg. If you're playing with an equal temperament (eg piano) accompaniment your open G will not match it and there's no other way to play that note. Presumably advanced violinists have to choose their own tradeoffs, but I was always taught to hear the fifth and would always be aiming for a just fifth (tuning an equal tempered fifth by ear would be a neat trick!).
Edit: Hmmm, thinking about it the guitar should be easier to tune to equal temperament (if that's what you want) as presumably the frets are equal-temperament semitones apart. For that tuning, it's the violinist who's "carrying the error".
On the cello (and viola) three perfect 3:2 ("pythagorian") fifths down from the A string makes for a low C that's noticeably flat when compared to equal-tempered instruments. For string quartet playing, it's manageable, because the violins will adjust when necessary, but for piano-accompanied playing, cellists will raise the low C a little so it doesn't clash with the C's on the piano.
> presumably the frets are equal-temperament semitones apart
Guitars are made of wood, which bends (both the neck and the top) as one adjusts the tension of the strings. As the neck bends, the length of the string between the bridge and nut changes, and
the height of the strings above the fingerboard varies in quite a complex way along the neck, changing the amount of tension added by pushing the string down to hold it against the fret.
Similar changes in frequency occur as frets and fretboard wear down a little, increasing the distance needed to properly fret a string.
The neck and top will warp and bend with age, with changes in temperature and humidity. And after a guitar has been played a while, it will have been worked over by one or more guitar technicians. There are so many variables that nothing can be taken for granted. Using accurate electronic tuners is presumably the simplest and fastest way for guitarists to maintain respectable pitch in most musical presentations.
Guitars have a neck tension rod with an adjustment screw that changes the neck bow. They also have intonation adjustment screws that adjust the location of the tail bridge for each string individually. Then there's still tail bridge string height adjustment.
Neck adjustment needs to be done because seasonal moisture changes can change the bow of the neck. Depends on guitar. This is mostly for proper playing action, so strings don't buzz but aren't too high from the fret board either.
Intonation needs to be changed when you change some other things, like the things mentioned above or string gauge for example. There a tuner is very handy, you can compare the string fretted on the twelvth fret to its harmonic there. The differences are small and hard to hear.
Same things apply for electric basses.
Don't know how things are dealt with on a violin or cello, but the lack of frets certainly makes some of the adjustments unneeded.
With guitar, you only adjust these things when doing maintenance, not in the back room and certainly not on stage.
As a sibling comment said, the notion is "Personal Data".
It is very wide and email address definitely fall within it. Also note IP is personal data, and an identifier like a UUID of the IDFA is personal data. The key point is that it must be related to an identified *or identifiable* data subject, ie even if that information is not enough to identify the person, the fact that it can contribute to it makes it personal data.
For anyone wondering if Manna was related to the Mana found in a lot of fantasy game (most notably Magic! The Gathering), it is not, I just looked it up.
Mana is a Melanesian word for some sort of spiritual life force!
One important thing to note is that the DPC (Irish DPA) did not want to fine WhatsApp and only did so after being forced by other DPAs through the arbitration process.
>"We welcome the first decision by the Irish regulator. However, the DPC gets about ten thousand complaints per year since 2018 and this is the first major fine. The DPC also proposed an initial € 50 million fine and was forced by the other European data protection authorities to move towards € 225 million, which is still only 0.08% of the turnover of the Facebook Group. The GDPR foresees fines of up to 4% of the turnover. This shows how the DPC is still extremely dysfunctional."
> The objection raises that not all computationally possible numbers are indeed assigned. Therefore, the lossy hash refers not to at least 16 numbers but to a maximum of 16 numbers. Furthermore, if additional data is stored along with the lossy hash, the number of individuals represented by the associated phone numbers can be reduced as data subjects not matching this additional data can be excluded. If e.g., so the DE SA, the gender is also stored, it is possible to at least divide these 16 in half.
So their hashcodes can be mapped to 16 different users, which can be trivially reduced to a single person if you have any additional information about them.
After they said it was technologically infeasible to combine WhatsApp with their service before the takeover (which was a condition for the takeover if one remembers), I don't trust anything they say anymore.
They stated to the merger review committee that the WhatsApp takeover couldn't feasably lead to data sharing with Facebook. And got fined 110m EUR for that, a pittance. You couldn't take out an insurance policy against a successful merger for that money. From [0]:
"When Facebook notified the acquisition of WhatsApp in 2014, it informed the Commission that it would be unable to establish reliable automated matching between Facebook users' accounts and WhatsApp users' accounts. It stated this both in the notification form and in a reply to a request of information from the Commission."
So acting as a tax haven was not enough, they also have to undermine every other EU regulation to keep their cash cows happy? Can't we just kick them out already?
I'd say in that case, the regulation was resilient enough to bring the case to fruition (although this is an argument that facebook will use to defend itself).
Hopefully this will motivate the DPC to be a little more active in the future (nobody likes to be wrong, especially wrong in public).
Some DPA are unwilling to act, the best thing to make them is to file complaint or support organisations that do (see the comment on NOYB). They are bound by laws to act, let's make them !
Only 8 of around 40 DPAs that were involved in the process disagreed with the Irish DPC's conclusion according to TFA, so I don't think it's fully fair to lay the blame solely on Ireland here.
I think you'd have a hard time demonstrating that Ireland actually is a tax haven. I've heard that accusation from several sources, but never anything convincing.
As for undermining regulations, the EU has procedures for ensuring member states enact compliant legislation, and after that the country has its own legal system, not more corrupt than average. It might be that they're applying the law as they understand it and that the judiciary has some independence from commercial interests.
You're welcome to make the case otherwise, but making accusations as you've done isn't what I'd consider constructive dialogue.
The EU insisted on Apple paying billions to the irish government that the irish government fought not to get. Irish-Dutch sandwich is a term designating the practice of using a tax loophole that lets big corporations avoid paying taxes.
Honestly, I'm not sure that the time to prove Ireland tax heaven will be that tough. Of course, the EU does not designate Ireland as a tax heaven, but you should have to keep in mind that Ireland is a member state of the EU and the tax heaven list is approved with unanimous vote which might be a cause for a conflict of interests.
Clarification. The EU asked the Irish Government to collect taxes that it declared were unpaid. It would then decide which countries were owed which chunk or the unpaid tax (all tax was declared through Ireland but sales were not solely in Ireland. So the tax was to be redistributed to the origin of sales). The issue with the judgement, and the reason the Irish Government were fighting it, was the ruling stated Ireland breached the law and provided an unfair advantage to one company. The Government were arguing that every company could avail of the same tax rules so it was not an unfair advantage / subsidy.
As for being a tax haven, this is something that is said by others who are outside of the Irish tax system and only look at the low corporate tax (they fail to see they other hidden taxes businesses have to pay like water tax, bin tax etc). Im not suggesting that the companies are fully "paying their way" but that it is too simplistic to only look at 1 tax requirement.
If you have worked in Ireland you would understand that the Irish tax system is extremely complex.....as employee you could pay tax in 3 separate income tax calculations, then a "bank bailout tax" that has remained even though the banks were bailed out. It is not uncommon for middle / high income workers to pay approx. 50% of their wage in deductions. Similarly if you tried to set up a company you would understand that the rules are not black and white but rather "you apply this tax calculation on a Friday, if the moon is full and the grass is blowing to the west"
You don't seem to understand what a tax haven is. It's not that domestic people don't pay taxes, or that there is no income tax, or payroll tax.
It's that corporate profits can be artificially shifted there and are then not or barely taxed.
Just read the wikipedia article please:
> Ireland ranks in all non-political "tax haven lists" going back to the first lists in 1994,[n][30] and features in all "proxy tests" for tax havens and "quantitative measures" of tax havens. The level of base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) by U.S. multinationals in Ireland is so large,[4] that in 2017 the Central Bank of Ireland abandoned GDP/GNP as a statistic to replace it with Modified gross national income (GNI*).[104][105] Economists note that Ireland's distorted GDP is now distorting the EU's aggregate GDP,[106] and has artificially inflated the trade-deficit between the EU and the US.
In all fairness:
The Dutch sandwich has been illigal for years now
The fine related to 'state aid' in the form of advice to Apple, and was appealed as the Exchequer makes far more money from Apple and other big tech then this fine would ever cover.
Have a look at the effective tax rates between Ireland and France if you want an eye opener
According to the OECD [1],France has an effective average corporate tax rate of 29.4% while Ireland has a 12.4% one. France has one of the highest in the OECD and Ireland one of the lowest. Unless you are arguing that Ireland is indeed effectively a tax haven, I don't see the eye opener.
> Ireland's base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) tools give some foreign corporates Effective tax rates of 0% to 2.5% on global profits re-routed to Ireland via their tax treaty network.
Sure. We're undermining every EU regulation. 100%. It's like a national Irish pastime! And the EU is a clique that can shun members at will, and Germany is a moral exemplar to us all.
Everyone benefits from the EU in different ways. But that Ireland is a tax haven is not exactly a shocking accusation. Ireland is actively lobbying against global minimum taxation rules, e.g.:
I'm not "shocked" by that accusation. I don't dispute the tax haven allegation, though we're likely to agree to the tax changes.
Here's a recent story from the meeting between the Irish and French leaders. The differing view on taxation is clearly there (though it's more that we're worried about a mandated EU premium on top of it, not that we're against a global minimum). But on every other key issue the French openly say we're working closely together. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/differences-over-co...
That's a fair distance from 'undermining every EU regulation'.
Why? The UK sent a letter invoking article 50 and after an extension they're out.
The UK is a third country and no more an EU member.
Leaving is very simple if you're willing to face the consequences.
And this is the true problem of the UKs exit. That they're neither willing to face the truth nor the fact that's it a third country now with all restrictions that come with that status.
You are suggesting that the consequences of leaving where well defined, upfront and the UK was simply not "willing to face the truth" - this is not true. The consequences of leaving were established, and negotiated after the invocation.
You should also take note of my comment below - there is no "they" wrt the UK, as the country was divided, and actively fighting over the issue - with some actively trying to prevent a brexit.
> You are suggesting that the consequences of leaving where well defined,
I'm not suggesting that at all. Actually I think that it was enormous stupidity to send that letter before England even defined what it wanted exactly.
It didn't help at all that Ms. May tried to appease the Brexit extremists in the conservative party. People that, as we now know , cannot be appeased, ever, since they just move the goal post to an even more extreme position.
> You should also take note of my comment below - there is no "they" wrt the UK, as the country was divided, and actively fighting over the issue - with some actively trying to prevent a brexit.
I appreciate that. Nevertheless 52% of people that bothered to vote wanted out.
Pissing off their European partners at every turn also certainly doesn't help
Unless Britain gives up it's extremist position I predict a world of hurt once the EU is no more willing to kick the can further down the road.
Long queues at immigration, when vacationing in Spain will be the least of your worries.
From a trade perspective, Northern Ireland is treated as part of the EU at the moment. This allows the Irish border to remain open, as there's no feasible way of enforcing it otherwise. For some context: The European union as a whole has 137 border crossings with third countries to its east. The Irish-Northern Irish border has 275.
Northern Ireland is still saying its goodbyes and looking for its jacket. And even GB is still caught up in hundreds of temporary exemptions and is in many senses operating as part of Europe.
Northern Ireland is still abiding by EU free movement of goods rules and EU Customs Union rules, and goods from the rest of the UK are inspected when they get to Northern Ireland.
Can you be more specific? As far as I can tell, the difficulties with Brexit are entirely self-inflicted, as a consequence of poor planning and self-contradictory goals.
The UK wanted to leave the EU and the common market. That means a border. That much has always been clear. That's basically the whole point of the common market.
The UK also doesn't want a border between Ireland and Northern Ireland but that's stricly an issue between the Republic of Ireland and the UK. Obviously as Ireland is a member and the EU is a constructive and diplomatically open entity, it was more than ready to negociate. Actually, multiple solutions have been proposed and at least one was tentivaly accepted before being reneged by the UK government.
I mean at some point in a negociation if the weak party can't come to its sense, you have to stop wasting everyone's time and tell them to get lost which is more or less what's happening with the UK.
The UK would have had to breach or at least seriously jeopardize the GFA to do so. An agreement they willingly signed up to. The UK brought that upon themselves.
Brexit doesn't, but the GFA was only possible because of the seamless border between the two countries. That lack-of-a-border can only exist if NI remains in the customs union. The rUK can only have a seamless border with NI if it's either in the customs union, or neither are. The UK decided the rUK didn't want to be in it. So now there's a border in the Irish sea.
> Threatening a return to violence in Ireland over Brexit is what I mean by "making things difficult".
Recognizing that putting in jeopardy an international agreement that brought an end to the troubles might incite violence, is not the same thing as threatening violence. It's common sense.
> The Troubles were not about sausage shipments between Belfast and Dublin.
You're right, they were an ethno-nationalist conflict, during which the British government sanctioned the murder of its own citizens, and now continues to protect those murderers from prosecution.
> You're right, they were an ethno-nationalist conflict, during which the British government sanctioned the murder of its own citizens, and now continues to protect those murderers from prosecution.
You're being intentionally obtuse now. If you can't see why an open border is vital for the continued peace, and why removing it would place tension on a peace that took decades to achieve, then you've already made up your mind.
I suppose I should have expected it when you blamed the EU for the self-inflicted woes of Brexit.
I'm not in any way slow to understand, not in this case anyway.
> If you can't see why an open border is vital for the continued peace, and why removing it would place tension on a peace that took decades to achieve, then you've already made up your mind.
I didn't say that, and I'm not even going to engage your straw man.
And I did not blame the EU for Brexit woes, I made a pretty basic statement of fact that would probably cover any negotiation, one which was intended only to signal compromise -- hence why the UK did not leave entirely -- not woe or blame.
Same experience here with a pedal steel. That's why I am now pushing my bandmates to adopt the Nashville Notation System which only deals in relative position of chords in the scale[1].
Hah! I love that there's another PSG player on HN who gets this right away... that's awesome. I never heard of this system specifically... I feel like a singer holding up 3, 4 or 5 fingers has been the way I've been cued lots of times to changes in a song I barely knew, without me even thinking that was a system. I bet they didn't either.
Separately, I know zero music theory... but PSG really was what let my brain get comfortable with a 3rd of a 4th being a 6th that was two frets down from the 5th of the root... I think probably engaging your knees and ankles in reaching for the physical positions in time builds almost like a muscle memory of the musical relationships... like the kind of control you get driving a manual car... but only if you already have the tones you're looking for in your head, and you know where you're going. PSG is the most mindbending realtime puzzle to play... so it makes sense that players need tricks to know where to go from a certain position (especially if you find yourself stuck in one when you jump into a song)
I learned about that in the Paul Franklin online course (expensive, but worth the money if you are unable to find a personnal teacher, yay europe).
I don't have absolute pitch (and a crappy relative one), but this "standardisation" based on the root note really helps build a knowledge of how chord changes "feel". I suspect this is what builds this ability to easily find the right notes when improvising.
Weel anyway, always happy to find people keeping the steel alive !
- To have a smartphone
- To give out your phone number
- To create an account
The worst? You can't even resale the ticket if the event is not sold out! Usually if I'm unable to attend a concert, I'll put my ticket up for sale for half the price, but with Dice, you just wasted money on empty seats. Great.