45 Matching Annotations
  1. Apr 2021
    1. It has two very different meanings, that you would have to distinguish by context. One meaning is just expressing that we have limitations. If you don't know something, that's just tough, you don't know it and you have to live with that. You don't have information if you don't have that information. The other meaning is that not only are there gaps in our knowledge, but often we don't even know what the gaps in our knowledge are. I don't know how to speak Finnish. That's a gap in my knowledge that I know about. I know that I don't know how to speak Finnish. But there are gaps in my knowledge that I'm not even aware of. That's where you can say "You don't know what you don't know" meaning that you don't even know what knowledge you are missing.

      I had this thought too.

    1. that can be played by up to 10 local players - turnwise.

      Description just said:

      Party mode brings Versus mode and Marathon mode where up to 10 players can play together and compete locally.

      Didn't mention whether it was at same time or in sequence. Hmm. Which is it? Video shows at least 2 can play at same time, so...

    1. However, some users didn’t know that they could interact with and click on the text field. It looked like an empty box. The line affordance under the old text fields was not clear to some users. The line was confused with a divider.
    2. The label and input were confused with body text, especially in dense compositions.
  2. Mar 2021
    1. It consists of two relations; the first one being exemplified in "An X is a Y" (simple hyponymy) while the second relation is "An X is a kind/type of Y". The second relation is said to be more discriminating and can be classified more specifically under the concept of taxonomy.

      So I think what this saying, rather indirectly (from the other direction), if I'm understanding correctly, is that the relationships that can be inferred from looking at a taxonomy are ambiguous, because a taxonomy includes 2 kinds of relationships, but encodes them in the same way (conflates them together as if they were both hyponyms--er, well, this is saying that the are both kinds of hyponyms):

      • "An X is a Y" (simple hyponymy)
      • "An X is a kind/type of Y".

      Actually, I may have read it wrong / misunderstood it... While it's not ruling out that simple hyponymy may sometimes be used in a taxonomy, it is be saying that the "second relation" is "more specifically under the concept of taxonomy" ... which is not really clear, but seems to mean that it is more appropriate / better for use as a criterion in a taxonomy.

      Okay, so define "simple hyponymy" and name the other kind of hyponymy that is referenced here.

    1. place


      to me that connotes a physical location.

      How can they be using that in semantics? Is that a common term/jargon used in the terminology/lexicon of semantics?

    1. Every woman talked to a student. This has two interpretations. Under one reading, every woman talked to the same student (the class president, for example), and here the noun phrase a student is specific. Under the second reading, various students were talked to. In this case, a student is non-specific.
    1. those aspects of a linguistic unit, such as a morpheme, word, or sentence,

      Speaking of ambiguity...

      Are the examples in the list "such as a morpheme, word, or sentence" examples of

      • aspects of a linguistic unit or of:
      • linguistic units themselves ?

      Unless you are already fairly familiar with those terms -- in particular, linguistic unit -- it may not be clear.

      I believe these are given as examples of "linguistic unit", in order to clarify what we mean by "linguistic unit" — perhaps (ironically) precisely because many people would be unfamiliar with that expression/term.

  3. Feb 2021
    1. So if you get a number of 130, there's an ambiguity in that you don't know whether the process dies of a signal 2 or just did an exit(130).
    1. A button that simply said “Confirm” wouldn’t necessarily make it immediately clear about what the reader’s action means.
    1. There’s only one hard thing in Computer Science: human communication. The most complex part of cache invalidation is figuring out what the heck people mean with the word cache. Once you get that sorted out, the rest is not that complicated; the tools are out there, and they’re pretty good.
    2. Cache and caching are some of the most ambiguous words in the IT world, and that’s because we can have multiple types of caching working in parallel and affecting content independently.
    1. I disagree, but I can't downvote it, because it is an important POV.

      What do you disagree with? Why? Why don't you share why? Apparently not the "answer" part, because you can downvote that, so you must mean one of the comments. Which one? Why is it an important POV?

  4. Jan 2021
    1. If you try to render content along with a non-content status code (100-199, 204, 205, or 304), it will be dropped from the response.

      Does "it" refer to

      • the content, or
      • the non-content status code ?
  5. Nov 2020
    1. if the value given in value is contained in the array that is the value for the field for the form


      • the value given in value prop of Field
      • the value for the field for the form (formState.values[field_name])
  6. Oct 2020
    1. I think it is still problematic since many people in the software industry use and understand "dependency" to mean the thing on which something depends (as indicated by this and other answers). So saying "being a dependency" indicates to those people the thing on which something depends, which is the opposite of the way I think of it (and what it means according to the dictionary).
  7. Jul 2020
  8. Jun 2020
    1. When you hear there's something called "template strings" coming to JavaScript, it's natural to assume it's a built-in template library, like Mustache. It isn't. It's mainly just string interpolation and multiline strings for JS. I think this is going to be a common misconception for a while, though.
    1. Disqus does not allow that user can use free licenses for their comments. It is not clear who has ownership of the comments.
    1. In systems engineering and requirements engineering, a non-functional requirement (NFR) is a requirement that specifies criteria that can be used to judge the operation of a system, rather than specific behaviors. They are contrasted with functional requirements that define specific behavior or functions

      This is a strange term because one might read "non-functional" and interpret in the sense of the word that means "does not function", when instead the intended sense is "not related to function". Seems like a somewhat unfortunate name for this concept. A less ambiguous term could have been picked instead, but I don't know what that would be.

  9. May 2020
    1. quantum blockchain

      Do they really use a quantum blockchain? What exactly do they mean by that? Probably just a buzzword they're using to attract interest but aren't actually meaning literally.

    1. must keep records of any processing activities that are "not occasional".Does anyone have a clearer definition as to what not occasional processing might be under this definition?
    1. While there are no legal precedents to spell out specifically what the actual terms mean, it can be interpreted from the testimony of people like Professor Mark Lemley from Stanford University, in front of the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary that the individual terms are defined as follows
  10. Apr 2020
    1. gets awkward with wider usage

      Not sure what they meant by "wider usage". Since they are contrasting "single page design", I would expect them to say something like "but becomes less useful with taller pages if the navigation is allowed to scroll off the screen (that is, unless fixed positioning is used)".

  11. Mar 2020
    1. Had a read through a few of the linked articles above... Wow. Messy, headache inducing stuff, and still so much vagueness.
    1. less secure sign-in technology

      What does that mean exactly?

      All of a sudden my Rails app's attempts to send via SMTP started getting rejected until I enabled "Less secure app access". It would be nice if I knew what was necessary to make the access considered "secure".

    1. If you have confidential or private content that you don't want to appear in Google Search results, the simplest and most effective way to block private URLs from appearing is to store them in a password-protected directory on your site server. Googlebot and all other web crawlers are unable to access content in password-protected directories.

      Does this only work for HTTP (Basic) Auth?

      What if you want to use your web site's normal login/auth page/system to "password-protect" a page/file?

      That seems to be insufficient to block content. Google doesn't seem to recognize it as being "blocked" and (even if robots.txt excludes the URL), can still be indexed if another site links to the URL, which can result in "Indexed, though blocked by robots.txt" warning.

      I wish it treated "protected by regular site login" the same as "password-protected".

  12. Oct 2013
    1. The foundation of good style is correctness of language, which falls under five heads. (1) First, the proper use of connecting words, and the arrangement of them in the natural sequence which some of them require. For instance, the connective "men" (e.g. ego men) requires the correlative "de" (e.g. o de). The answering word must be brought in before the first has been forgotten, and not be widely separated from it; nor, except in the few cases where this is appropriate, is another connective to be introduced before the one required. Consider the sentence, "But as soon as he told me (for Cleon had come begging and praying), took them along and set out." In this sentence many connecting words are inserted in front of the one required to complete the sense; and if there is a long interval before "set out," the result is obscurity. One merit, then, of good style lies in the right use of connecting words. (2) The second lies in calling things by their own special names and not by vague general ones. (3) The third is to avoid ambiguities; unless, indeed, you definitely desire to be ambiguous, as those do who have nothing to say but are pretending to mean something.

      Use of language in good style.

    1. Words of ambiguous meaning are chiefly useful to enable the sophist to mislead his hearers.

      Interesting connection, sophist use ambiguous language for false persuasion.