That last one was the killer difference for me. Firefox wants me to be able to see (at least part of) the title of each tab, even if that means I can't see all my tabs at once. I want to see all of my tabs at once, and I don't care if I can see the title - the favicon is enough.

I did try configuring Firefox to let me shrink the tabs more, and even tried messing with its GTK configuration, but no luck.

So I do feel a bit bad for using Brave instead of Firefox, but after months of dealing with Firefox's UI I lost patience.

Non-technical skills matter. People and organizations have multi-faceted incentives. If you think the incentives of the people making decisions are leading to bad outcomes, then learn how to make that heard to them. Learn the situation as they see it, and use your own, better-aligned(?) incentives to improve the organization. And if it's not worth trying, so be it. But you need to accept that much of the world is you live in will continue to be shaped by the people who care enough to see "that hustle life nonsense" as a worthwhile trade.

If you want to read 23,000 words on banking regulation, its uses, abuses, the incentives faced by both the banks and their watchmen, and an explanation for how we ended up where we are, then go ahead and jump into it. Personally, I think the latter is far more useful than the former. I enjoyed it, at least.

Bear with me; the free market seems to think that history isn't a very useful area of study, and lots of people agree. At least some of this probably comes from bad experiences with history classes. I like to think of history instruction as having three levels. The lowest level - the one you'll hear people complaining the most about - is presenting history as a dry series of facts. At it's worst, the entire course can be reduced to a hashmap; event -> date. Rinse, repeat.

The second layer presents history as a narrative. Most people like stories, so this is much more compelling, and makes it a lot easier to enjoy history. But the highest level of teaching is about systems. It's not enough to colorfully explain that King so-and-so was furious at the offense given by King the-other-one. You have to try to make students understand the world that these two kings existed in; how things as small as calling 9th-century European polities "countries" can disastrously mis-callibrate our models. Once you understand the system that someone is working in, you can hope to understand them, and why they do the things they do. Once you have that, you can hope to pass reasonable judgement on their actions.

This article is all about systems and tradeoffs. It is aspiring to that third level. The title is arguably a little bit misleading, but I think it accomplishes it's goal, and personally, I feel like I've come away with a reasonable overall understanding of his thesis, and I think it matches the title.

A lot of people in this thread have been mentioning the importance of risk tolerance in Japan's (lack of a) software industry. He gives some good examples of just how omnipresent that risk aversion can be; from getting funding, to renting an apartment, to finding a significant other, running a startup makes your life much more difficult in Japan than in eg the SF Bay. He also gives a bit more context on the matter of overall software quality, and I think that's an important point: writing assembly for small-scale electronics or cars or industrial machines is just as much "software" as writing a modern web app.

Also, while I'm not universally endorsing Japanese web design; dense UIs for the win!

Of course, if you don't believe in any of the causes you might need a clearance for, it doesn't matter, but don't be too quick to make that assumption either. A lot of stuff gets classified by the government, and not all of it is morally noisome.

That said, I think that the evidence we have is against this being notably related to GPL and her defense of it. She published her complaint against MediaTek almost two years before she "got her wings clipped" - the timelines don't really support the GPL issue as being a notable part the matter. Also, the situation for IP protection in China is on an upwards trend (https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/10/16/china-s-record-on-i...), and part of that is government led. I have a difficult time seeing police give her so much trouble for this.

My preferred theory is that the straw which broke the camel's back was her minimally filtered commentary on the response to the June 2023 Plaza Hollywood Hotel stabbing. Naomi Wu feels strongly - and I believe, reasonably - that this was an anti-lesbian hate crime, and was furious that nobody in media was willing to acknowledge it as such. Male chauvinism and gendered violence, LGBT rights, public questioning of the results of a police investigation, and all in a venue which is easily accessible to foreigners - these are all things which are far more politically sensitive in China than IP compliance.

For some examples of what she was saying, scroll through her comments here: https://twitter.com/search?q=(from%3ARealSexyCyborg)%20until..., especially this thread: https://twitter.com/RealSexyCyborg/status/166501414504826880... (Twitter account required for both).