Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | tigeroil's commentslogin

Indeed - I was a bit surprised by them mentioning this to be honest, since, as I understand it, this is kind of a widely accepted limitation of setTimeout - it's purely a 'best effort' timer. It's not intended to be something where "yes after exactly Xms it'll execute.


I think the simple and boring answer is it really depends. As you say, your commute is short, but also I think there's just a personality element to it. Some people absolutely thrive and are way more productive remotely (and I think HN skews towards that type of person), and other people are the opposite, losing their minds if they don't have colleagues beside them to talk and collaborate with.


> I think the simple and boring answer is it really depends

Yep, people are different.

> are way more productive remotely

Is this measured, or they are feel more productive? (I think, answer is the same: there is full spectrum here and somebody is less productive but feels more productive and somebody is really more productive and, maybe, feels the same :-))

But my previous team (where I worked at the peak of COVID) was less productive for sure (I can compare release notes between product release and see as they are shrinking from release to release at COVID time!), though we have some team members who thought that they become more productive!.

Also, long time ago I worked in distributed team (St.Petersburg, Russia / Boston, USA / Santa Clara, USA) and we had twice-a-year week-long whole-team in-person meetings in Boston office (I was from St.Petersburg). These were two hyper-productive weeks, when we solved a lot of problems which accumulated between these meeting, fast and efficient. It was before video-conferencing, so all other meetings was phone-calls (only audio), but still.

I understand, that it is not statistics, it is anecdotal, but I'm very skeptical about broad claims that distributed / remote teams (!) can be as efficient (or even more) as local ones. Personal contributors — sure, all people are different, but whole teams — I'm in doubt. We are social animals, and all these video calls are still conversation with pixels, not people.


Depends of your company, I personally meet my team roughly every 3 months and I push back any task on the calendar because I know the days in the office aren't even half the productivity of the usual remote days. I even avoid big deployments during these days.

Remote is usually all focused work and the office time is mostly coffee chats and random interruptions of unrelated subjects because on how much easier it is to ping people.

So on my case it's the opposite, I'm a bit skeptical you can achieve the level of focus you have in a remote team in a standard open space, that would require some discipline that not everybody has.

Not to mention the abomination of the open space with no reserved desk so you aren't even guaranteed to sit close to your team, removing the only potential useful advantage of being on-site.


Open space is PURE EVIL. Don't have fixed working place where you could leave your headphones (and external DAC in my case), cup, charging wires for your gadgets (not everything is USB-C still), some papers, etc is PURE EVIL too. Combined together it is ninth circle of hell.

Never worked in open space and refused (otherwise good) offers twice due to open space in office.

Culture in which everybody can ping anybody at any time is bad too. It is why I speak about cooler chat (when person already distracted), not any chat :-)


The combination of these things you're mentioning is one of the main reasons, at least for me, that WFH is so much more productive. A lot of tech companies have evolved a culture and built offices that are in opposition to doing good work. Open plan offices have been the norm in my experience over the last 10 years (maybe more). Anytime interruption via Slack/Teams is the typical culture.

I was much more open to working in the office when I actually had my own office.


Well sure I do agree but I've never seen a tech company which isn't working in an open space. The non open-space companies feel even more rare than the remote ones.

So when you compare remote productivity, that's what you have to compare with.


I suspect they also know full well that the global ones will be resold in China.


You mean like the time I had a salesperson demanding that we turn off Cloudflare across our entire domain because he'd read some random article somewhere saying we should?


The goal of sales isn't to block upto a 1/3 of world wide traffic. Turning off Cloudfare means more traffic and more sales are not blocked. Did you even read the article or did you dismiss it because it came from 'sales'.


Sales: "look, I turned this off and sales went way up"

Security: "We had to cancel every single one of those sales because they came from stolen credit cards. It's costing us more to deal with that then we are earning"


Accounting: "We're measuring a pretty big loss because security cancelled legitimate purchases together with fake ones and now clients are leaving."


I really don't think so. Their competitors have much, much better offerings here, so it's clearly not a limitation of the technology.


Their competitors don’t have the restriction of keeping nearly everything on device that Apple does and is a selling point for them.


Indeed - they're fantastic for specific use-cases, i.e. ECS where instances are "disposable" but they're the last thing you want for something you want running continuously.


Logic is a weird one. It has really truly excellent included instruments (such as Alchemy) and effects, but the app itself feels rather outdated. The mixer, whilst having had some nice features added since Logic 9, is in dire need of an update.


Wouldn't that be a sign of a product that was purchased by Apple and then left to languish as is with just enough effort to not let it rot?


I believe the Logic team are still based in Germany, where the original Emagic team that produced Logic were based, so it's not that they are languishing, but an intentional decision has been made (either by them or Apple) to keep this structure.

Logic has such a long history, it's not surprising that it shows it's age, and has 'weird' behaviour that you wouldn't choose today. It's got stuff in there from the early 90s, as it started out as a midi sequencer before pulling audio into the product.


Apple bought Logic over 20 years ago. I’d be surprised if it shared any code with the pre-acquisition version.


Why not? Current macOS ships code older than that.


All the AI hubris but Logic still does not do fades or zero crossings when cutting audio clips. And don't get me started on the audio zoom. This is basic stuff!

It feels like the audio code was not touched since emagic days.


In defence of the AI hubris, I laid down a funky rhythm guitar track, verse and chorus, and then fiddled around with the AI bassist and AI drummer and blow-me-down-with-a-feather if the results weren't outstanding. Like a perfect demo. I was able to send that to my mate and say, here you go, here's a demo with guide tracks for the bass.

For making demos and filling-out sketches, I'm thrilled. Here's the audio, and all rough playing, bum notes and general incompetence are my own.

Drums and Bass by Logic AI: https://www.mixcloud.com/hnvr46/demo-rvg/


Huh. Doesn't return to the one, ever? You've got sort of a I - III - IV thing going on, and it just goes to IV and stays there forever. Did you think that was the root?

Fun toy, though! I take it you extended it backwards into an intro, or you have playing it can read that you muted, leading into your guitar stuff. Did you play to a click or is it reading your tempo too?


I think I played straight into Logic with the metronome on, two sections and then pushed that forward to create some blank bars for the intro and then added the drummer on multiple tracks and same for bassist, then fiddled with some of the settings for each section.

I was pretty impressed, though, for approximately ten minutes start to finish. I should probably go recall what I played so I can try and finish the riffs off or something.

An actual competent musician ought to be able to make the most ridiculous demos with this thing.


That's astonishing. The best I've ever heard? No. Completely freaking serviceable, especially for a demo? Oh yeah.


I know, it's nuts!



I am talking about automatically adding fades and/or automatically snapping to nearest zero crossing when cutting audio to prevent clicks.

Every other modern DAW does this automatically. In Logic, you are expected to do this manually every time you do an audio edit. Like it's 2004 again.

Edit: added clarification about zero crossings and editing workflow


This seems like a very weird hill to die on, specifically concidering this is a feature I would want explicitly off and wouldn't care about existing.

It's editing 101, check your cuts are at a safe boundry of put in a fade. I've never seen an auto feature do what I want though and need to redo it anyway, so just doing nothing is half as much work.

I would much rather complain about lack of AAF support in logic but then again I would never recommend logic to anyone other than for music production work purely because that's the only use case the devs seem to care about.


You might be diligent to check your cuts in Sample Editor.

However when you zoom in in the Arrange the way the waveform is rendered it seems like you are cutting on a zero crossing when in fact you are not.

It lies to you and leads you to believe you've done the right thing.

I have had the pleasure of working on tracks with dozens of clicks that I had to remove thanks to the laziness of Logic developers, pardon me for dying on the hill and spoiling your view.


I don't use logic. I find it to be no good but regardless I still wouldn't die on that hill.

There's many things I disliked about logic when I tried it and that led to my opinion on its only useful for music production, I would probably not even say editing...

More on the composition level. If I'm tracking it's into Pro Tools, any edits happen there too. I personally don't move out but other's do really prefer to do more production work in Logic so I would happily bounce out tracks for them. Ironically AAF would solve that problem too...

Regarding cuts on zero... I basically never do so all my cuts will have a crossfade, generally the real world is just a little too chaotic to have a zero crossing just about where I would prefer the cut...


Unfortunately I am in position where I have to master mixes done in Logic and this backwards crap can easily add up to half an hour onto every track. Sick of it. Dying on that hill!


I mean put it in your requirements and reject the mix if it contains pops and clicks... Whoever did the mixing has the original with cuts so can add fades much much quicker than you can.

And if they don't well, more work for them.

Or just add it to the bill, if you are clear upfront that it will add $$$ there's no issues there.

I've had sessions rejected by mastering engineers for stuff that I've had to correct, why make this your problem.


Noted, thank you.


it doesn't? I never heard pops when trimming clips


As a mastering engineer, I am removing them from Logic mixes almost every day. Sometimes I need to pinch myself to reascertain that it's really 2024.


Pedantic note: Alchemy itself was brought in by Apple's acquisition of Camel Audio. So not Apple acquisitions go wrong.


Pros hate UI redesigns


This is not a good argument as to why we should break encryption.

Rather, it's an argument that law enforcement should start engaging with those groups on telegram directly, i.e. setting up stings etc and just actually go and catch them. Do some good old police work.

If you're able to find them on telegram, clearly law enforcement are capable too, if they're resourced and willing. Encryption isn't the problem here.


Indeed and this is the other thing - even if Telegram don't themselves co-operate with law enforcement, it'd be fairly easy for law enforcement to request access to the phone number from the carrier, then use it to sign into the Telegram account in question and access all of the messages.


You can set a password that’s required to authenticate a new device.

Once that’s set, after the SMS code, then (assuming you don’t have access to an existing logged in device because then you are already in…), you can either reset the password via an email confirmation _or_ you can create a new account under that phone number (with no existing history, contacts, etc).

If you set a password and no recovery email, there is no way for them to get access to your contacts or chat history barring getting them from Telegram themselves.


Indeed. Even being charitable and assuming that they're not lying (they say elsewhere that they've shared zero bytes with law enforcement, despite this being demonstrably false), in reality if say, they were to arrest the founder in an EU country (France, perhaps), all they need to do is threaten him with twenty years in prison and I'm sure he'll gladly give up the keys from all the different locations they supposedly have.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: