The problem is that first class callables actually makes a new object wrapper for each reference, so trim(…) != trim(…). (It can be true in some cases, it depends if the memory is freed for the first reference).
I’m one of the few contributors to ext-php-rs. I’d be interested in contributing to your fork if you are planning to support your fork too. I think there’s a lot of QOL improvements to be made still and also adopting newer php features etc
Yes, I'm planning to support my fork of ext-php-rs, given that it will be heavily used by our mongodb driver.
I've actually sent an email to David Cole, asking him to make a maintainer of the original repo, but he hasn't replied yet, feel free to send your MRs to our fork in the meantime!
I have experienced the same, though I’ve done less visual comparisons. Comparing % quality like-for-like between webp and avif, on average avif files are slightly larger than webp counterparts.
Things didn’t materially improve when using high compression (slow) encoding settings. Could have been a bad encoder (libavif iirc)— there might be an explanation but on the face of it I saw worse performance than webp.
The "work" is the arbitrary JavaScript in the `render()` function. In Concurrent mode, a `render()` function that renders 1000 children can now be interrupted "between" renders of all those children.
It's akin to doing `Header( LoginLink( GetLoginName() ) )` versus
The interrupt between rendering components (pieces of work) can now cancel the whole render operation (because say, the parent component has now been updated / wants to be re-rendered), or can pause the render tree while something like a high-priority animation frame is rendered.
> Siri uses a random identifier — a long string of letters and numbers associated with a single device — to keep track of data while it’s being processed, rather than tying it to your identity through your Apple ID or phone number — a process that we believe is unique among the digital assistants in use today. For further protection, after six months, the device’s data is disassociated from the random identifier.
Interesting, I thought I had heard it widely reported that Apple was keeping hold of audio records tagged with your Apple ID for 6 months, before anonymizing. That looks like it wasn't the case, and Apple was only tagging those recordings with a device ID, presumably to associate recordings with other recordings.
Yeah, "widely-reported" was The Verge. As John Gruber points out[0], The Verge wasn't wrong, but I can't say their reporting would give the average reader a good grasp on what was really going on. That would include myself: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20724558
From 2017, about the recording and tokenization steps:
Siri records your queries too, but she doesn’t catalog them or provide access to the running list of requests. You can’t listen to your history of Siri interactions in Apple’s app universe.
While Apple logs and stores Siri queries, they’re tied to a random string of numbers for each user instead of an Apple ID or email address. Apple deletes the association between those queries and those numerical codes after six months. Your Amazon and Google histories, on the other hand, stay there until you decide to delete them.
From Wired, “Apple finally reveals how long Siri keeps your data”, in 2013, about later disassociation from the tokens:
Once the voice recording is six months old, Apple "disassociates" your user number from the clip, deleting the number from the voice file. But it keeps these disassociated files for up to 18 more months for testing and product improvement purposes.
"Apple may keep anonymized Siri data for up to two years," Muller says "If a user turns Siri off, both identifiers are deleted immediately along with any associated data."
I don’t want audio recordings or transcripts to rain in their servers.
I don’t even want “smart” Siri. I want stupid Siri aka proper speech to text locally + a fixed set of commands I know/learn/discover
There is no need to send all of this to them. If I want to suggest a command, allow me using a simple form.
I recently had a child, and being a very tech savvy person, I'm mostly dreading the need to govern what they have access and do on their smartphones, internet, websites etc.
My gut reaction is that parents looking through their children's phones, apps, messages and photos is a huge invasion of privacy. As the article suggests though, there's also the need to protect and manage what our children are involved in, just like offline activities.
There's something about smartphones that is so personal, that there doesn't quite seem to be a good comparison for pre-technology privacy. I don't think I'd have a problem with dictating what my child watches on television, eats, drinks, or otherwise consumes - but controlling smartphones seems something more akin to thoughtcrime.
I was lucky enough to grow up when technology and connectivity was so new that apparently it wasn't used in such a mainstream sinister way as it appears to be now. Going through puberty seems like an even more harrowing experience (ala the move Eighth Grade) with the internet, that seems to go quite unnoticed.
I have 2 girls, one of which has an iPhone (with parental controls), and I completely agree that the snooping/askingforpasswords/etc is really full-on and crosses a boundary.
My girls are a bit too young for me to worry about parties/drugs just yet, so I don't have the answer to what the best approach is, but I truly hope I never have to resort to spying on my kids. My parents were incredibly open with everything (60s hippies) and we were taught that we could always talk to them about anything we were curious about.. sex, drugs, whatever.. and they'd help us navigate it and educate us. I think that worked out quite well, and I figure my job is to try replicate that level of love/trust/openness but taking technology and digitally-connection into account. It's bloody hard though!
I don't think the intentional is to get people to smoke who otherwise wouldn't. It's to get the people who are going to buy cigarettes, and in doing so, chose their brand. When confronted with many choices of competing products, having someone you trust and admire favour a particular product may be enough to tip the scales and get you to take that option.
I find myself doing this often, due to all the podcast ads I hear! If I'm going to buy a mattress or printed framed picture I'm going to start with I've heard about from some "influencer" I follow.
I guess because we "follow" people who interest us or are like minded. I don't set out to "follow an influencer", but when I subscribe to a podcast, or follow someone on twitter because I find their comedy hilarious; that's what I'm doing.
