That is why the meta commentary about identity politics made complete sense to me. It's simply observing that this discussion (like so many others) tends to go this way, and suggests a better alternative - without a straw man.

I come across it often and struggle with cognitive dissonance every time - I know of the regionalism but it feels so strongly like a glaring grammatical error.

I see/hear the specific phrase “needs fixed” most often.

Some members of congress, apparently from both major parties, are proposing legislation to raise the cap from $10,000 to $100,000 or otherwise raise or remove the cap. But these proposals are not certain to go anywhere.

Of course GDP isn’t the only factor in world power status, but it sure is a big one.

Compared to the US, China also has a far larger labor force, a greater ability to manufacture things, and greater government control over its population.

Access to natural resources is similar for many things, less for some (like oil and gas) but greater for others (like rare earth minerals).

So every category where the current phone is the best has a 100% full bar. Where it’s not, you can immediately visualize if it’s 70% as good as the best device or 99% as good - even if the high score for that category is, say, 136.

A lot of stricter review sites will say something like (made up example) “no phone gets above a 4/10 score for zoom; only a DSLR/mirrorless exceeds that.”

Which is totally valid! But I want to know how the device I’m reading about scores within its category. Those smaller bars make it look like this gadget has one major weakness despite its other high scores, when the reality might be that it actually has the best - or close to the best - zoom ability out of all devices in this class.

Seems like it would avoid a lot of the issues like atmospheric interference, frequency congestion, and careful placement of receiver infrastructure.

Interesting - it makes it look like Bash uses $ to “read” from the variable, while in PHP/Perl $ only indicates that the rest of the symbol _is_ a variable.

That describes a concept, over several stages, where a compiler can be made to change the behavior of programs it compiles in a difficult-to-find way.

[0]: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rdriley/487/papers/Thompson_1984_Ref...

> Fugger charged residents one Rheinischer gulden a year, the equivalent of one month's salary at the time.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27087999

Points: 3

# Comments: 1

As the article mentions, you could dial the 67 prefix to block your outgoing caller ID on an individual call.

With the blocking-of-blocking, you had the opposite - the 82 prefix _disabled_ outgoing caller ID block on an individual call, allowing you to call subscribers that blocked blocked numbers.

I think my folks finally decided to drop the caller ID blocking after the phone company switched from 7-digit to mandatory 10-digit dialing for all calls. It was just too many digits to dial with the prefix, especially since half the time you would dial without the prefix, get the "blocked" message, then dial again with the prefix.

I had a similar reaction - email open tracking is something you assume, by default, that regular individuals can't do. And I found it very invasive, even though I know the same tracking exists on all the non-personal email I received.

Since then I've made it a point not to open those invitations until I know I'm ready to respond - since "I never saw the email" is a less harmful conclusion for my snooping friend to draw than "I opened the email and decided not to respond."