> He makes an explicit case for both (1) and (2). He doesn't try and merely imply (2).
You read wrong. tvladek did not say Buecheler implied anything, only that being correct about one thing does not imply being correct about another.
And if you advertised for a slave you would presumably be dealing with the owner of said slave, so if you were offering a reasonable price, then no that would not be an exploitative offer.
Khoo's job posting offers value and leaves it up to the applicant to decide if that is inline with their requirements. For some it will be a dream job. For others it will not.
Slaves do not choose to be slaves, that is part of the definition of the term. The introduction of hyperbole and apples to oranges comparisons does not further conversation.
Yes, that's true, point to you! I'm not sure I would call it 'popular' though. Maybe 'somewhat common among people with no other possible options outside of death or prison (death).'
I do understand this but what is wrong with recommending picking up a USB 3 external drive over USB 2? I doubt the Pi is the only device it will be used with.
"I am still working on the best way to access the data without disconnecting the drive from the Raspberry Pi every time I want to add/remove something."
It sounds like he's putting the data on the USB drives from other computers, not from the RPi.
If you want to get pedantic, then the Facebook corporation is the most popular social network corporation. We're talking about platforms here, not the parent company.
> And that's because the cut-off is not biological, it's social.
I disagree. There is a wealth of biological evidence to show that a human's brain doesn't finish maturing until (approx.) age 25. By that standard you could make the argument that 25 is when people reach adulthood.
Of course, what we're really talking about here is expectations of responsibility, so even though "by 15 or 16 people should already be expected to act like adults" these young people still have maturing to do.
It's not surprising that in our rich modern society the age of 'adulthood' has risen to 25, especially considering we live so much longer than we used to.
Why is the definition of adulthood "finish maturing"? If anything that should be middle age, i.e. in the middle of adulthood, not the start of it.
By your definition as soon as someone becomes an adult they start degrading in mental ability. The peak of mental ability should match the middle of the productive years.
But in any case the maturity of the brain is not just biologically controlled - it's environmentally controlled. The brain of someone treated like an adult will be more mature than that of someone teated like a child.
The brain responds to stimulus, it doesn't really have a pre-programmed makeup. It has basic abilities, but that ones that are expressed are the ones that it needs/uses.
All fair points, but I never defined adulthood, only disagreed with the parent which stated "the cut-off is not biological, it's social". Of course there are social factors as well as biological. I'm sure I'm not qualified to form such a definition, though if I tried it would have to include many factors.
I, for example, moved out of my parents' house at 18, but I wouldn't say I became an 'adult' until at least my early 30's. Even now I feel like a kid most of the time, in spite of my many responsibilities - even with a kid of my own!
I don't think we ever finish maturing, and I think we never stop learning, even though our 'peak' mental ability may come and go.
There is also a wealth of biological evidence to show that a human's brain and body start deteriorating significantly before age 25; you can pick and choose the evidence that supports the conclusion you want.
In practice, our supposedly rich modern society is becoming mentally unhealthy to a degree that increasingly outweighs the material gains of recent generations; mental illness is common, suicide has become a major cause of death among young people, birthrate has crashed below extinction level. We can fix what we are doing wrong - a large part of which is treating young people like prize animals in gilded cages - or our society can end up in Darwin's bit bucket. We can decide which of these options we prefer, but I don't see the universe giving us the option of "neither".
A valid objection, but is it really meaningful to talk about intelligence of toddlers in the same context as intelligence of other people? I mean, they're still figuring out that they have hands, and that they control them.
You should consider expanding this to include other types of therapy workers. I know from doing tech work amongst mental health professionals that most are required to log x amount of hours doing y before they can obtain licensing as a z. Since you have the platform and domain knowledge you should be able to add features to widen your target demographic.
I just discovered that my demo video is recorded at too high a bitrate. It's at 2.8Mbit/s, compared to 1.3-1.8Mbit/s for subscriber videos. That's probably because I used my standard screencast encoding settings (which are set nice and high) for a video that has a lot more motion than my standard screencast.
Fixing this alone will probably do wonders for my conversion rate.
Thanks a million to tankbot for starting the conversation rolling and to alecthomas for helping me to troubleshoot it over email.
In researching this issue, I found recommendations that 2.5mbps is probably the most you should plan for in North America. I'm not sure how accurate or current that recommendation is, but since I was seeing problems at 2.8mbps, it seems reasonable. (It also might explain why I have such a large proportion of international subscribers.) That said, I'd really love to get my bitrate below 2.0mbps, because that's what my actual videos come in at.
I went into my video export settings and fiddled (and fiddled, and fiddled) and ended up finding a compromise that gave me 1.94mbps at the cost of slightly-visible artifacting during transitions. [1] Bingo! Uploaded, deployed, done.
Well, not entirely done. I'm still using my old settings for most videos, because it doesn't have any visible compression artifacts at all, at least not until you get out the magnifying glass. (I can get away with such high quality because, although my screencasts have more transitions and motion than average, they're still mostly unchanging text.) But I don't want to run into this problem again. It's embarrassing. And I like killing problems dead. DEAD!
So I modified my deploy script to run `ffprobe` and pull out the bitrate for each new video. If it exceeds 1750kbps, I get a warning. And if it exceeds 2000kbps, the script fails. [2] That'll do it.
Of course, the real root cause here is that I don't have visibility into client-side performance issues. Eventually, I'd like to modify the client-side code to report back playback experience. That would have detected this problem much sooner, and it will protect me against CDN/network issues as well, which are particularly hard for me to get visibility into.
Thanks again to tankbot and alecthomas for helping me find this problem.
[1] The settings I ended up with, in case you're curious:
Video encoding: H.264; 24 frames per second; 2250kbps max bit rate; "High" quality; Single-pass
[2] These thresholds are pretty conservative, and I'll increase them if necessary. I like starting with low thresholds because it gives me more visibility into what's going on, at the cost of requiring me to be a bit more hands-on until I get things dialed in.
Thanks! I have the videos on a geo-balanced CDN which is well overprovisioned, so it should be okay. I just tried it myself and everything seemed fine. Of course, because it's geo-balanced, there could be a problem I'm not seeing. If anybody else has problems, could you let me know?
It's unwatchable for me too. It appears to be buffering fine (I see the gray buffering bar quite a bit ahead), but just stalls and stutters quite a lot.
Hmmm... that's disturbing. It's stuff like this that keeps me up at night: not things breaking, but things breaking without me knowing. Thanks for chiming in. I've sent you an email to follow up.
If anybody else sees this issue, and you're willing to take a few minutes to help me troubleshoot it, please let me know. james@letscodejavascript.com . Thanks!
I should clarify that the video quality was fine, but it would pause for buffering often at the beginning. Once I made it a few minutes in this cleared up. I'm in the Pacific Northwest, USA if that helps with troubleshooting.
Thanks. I'm the Pacific NW as well (Portland), so we're probably hitting the same server. I'd guess the CDN had to adjust to the sudden influx of traffic. Let me know if you have any more problems (james@letscodejavascript.com) and we can dig into it further.
You read wrong. tvladek did not say Buecheler implied anything, only that being correct about one thing does not imply being correct about another.
And if you advertised for a slave you would presumably be dealing with the owner of said slave, so if you were offering a reasonable price, then no that would not be an exploitative offer.
Khoo's job posting offers value and leaves it up to the applicant to decide if that is inline with their requirements. For some it will be a dream job. For others it will not.
Slaves do not choose to be slaves, that is part of the definition of the term. The introduction of hyperbole and apples to oranges comparisons does not further conversation.