You deny the statistic in the article. Then you use corporate speak like "we internally think about things..." Then you link to a blog post titled "Measuring Prevalence", which doesn't have a single data point with a number in it. Not to mention that it's another mess of CorpSpeak that sounds like a PR committee wrote it, not a human being.

The problem is not your intentions. It's clear that you actually want to engage people, given that you're replying actively on this board, even to impolite comments. The problem is the style of communication. It sounds constructed, artificial, developed through a process, like you and a bunch of people are sitting there drafting replies and tweaking until you have something that won't come back later and bite you in the butt. The problem with that strategy is that you end up saying very little of meaning at all.

So maybe to make things more concrete - is there a statistic on measuring the impact of recommendations that you do agree with that you can share?

So abstract mathematics are leaky, and applied mathematics are not (you don’t have to know how they work to apply them, e.g. regression).

I can copy text in Safari on iOS. What are you on?

I don't know about others, but it's not boring reading for me. I appreciate it when someone points out the downvotes and responds, as OP has done here.

We shouldn't treat downvotes the same was we do trolls and ignore them.

It's rare because it's hard. It's much easier to just pretend you have a hammer and treat everything like a nail.

Where are you next week? This is a show I'll travel to follow.

It’s a trade off between convenience and security. Consumers _do_ care, just not enough to put unusual amounts of effort in. These moves by Apple make it much easier, and could become things consumers expect from their devices, since they don’t have to give up convenience to have them.

“If I would have asked people what they wanted, they would have said a faster horse”

You’re right. If Apple can show people you can have security and it can be easy, people will demand that.

I've actually been thinking about doing something similar in India. How has it been going for you?

> What’s wrong with that argument?

At an individual, probably nothing. But at a macro level, apathy is equivalent to a lack of legitimacy, which is a big problem. If the cancer of apathy spreads too far, the entire system comes crashing down.

It’s like a party where your job is to bring one of the mixers. You don’t bring yours, nothing that terrible happens. No one brings any, and the party becomes a disaster.

>a lack of legitimacy

Well... yes. And I view this as a good thing. The current US voting system is broken and I am not sure it is fixable simply by voting more - that simply entrenches the current system.

I prefer to use illegitimacy and disenfranchisement to spur useful change to the systems themselves. I want to see somethink like ranked choice with an instant runoff, the abolition of the electoral college and a simple one person, one vote choice for president, without dividing people into small groups first.

Reforming the senate is likely also a good idea.

Apathy and illegitimacy are the kindling needed to foster real change.

I don't think he's arguing for apathy, can't think of a less apathetic individual if I tried. I think he's rightly pointing out that batch processing can be more efficient, and optimizing the schedule for such a process is something many people don't consider.

Well, after years without electricity, you may start thinking that people not bringing mixers is a symptom rather than a problem.

But what about the Big Pop?