Watch out, Trotsky!
cleanup.pictures – Remove objects, people, text and defects from any picture.
The Nasty Logistics of Returning Your Too-Small Pants (via densediscovery.com).
Now is usually when people start wondering why more returns aren’t just donated. Don’t lots of people in the U.S. need winter coats and smartphones and other crucial tools of everyday life that they can’t afford? Wouldn’t providing those things be good PR for retailers? Wouldn’t it be a tax write-off, at the very least? Donation would be the morally sound move. But companies have little incentive to act morally, and many avoid large-scale domestic donations because of what is politely termed “brand dilution”: If paying customers catch you giving things to poor people for free, the logic goes, they’ll feel like the things you sell are no longer valuable.
The posthuman dog.
If humans disappeared tomorrow, about 1 billion dogs would be left on their own.
10 Idées reçues sur l'UX Design.
Envie de déjouer les pièges de l’UX ? Ça tombe bien, on en a fait un quiz !
The Covid Art Museum.
The world’s 1st museum for art born during Covid19 quarantine.
Full of gems.
The Syllabus’ 100th Edition Retrospective.
Fixing a bug is not refactoring. Adding a new feature is not refactoring. But we may refactor before we fix a bug or add a feature.
Actually, it’s a good idea to do so.
It’s also a good idea to keep these 2 phases distinct.
Not only for 美学.
Camouflage Against the Machines.
Utilizing a technique called “Adversarial Patch” that induces false recognition by adding a specific pattern to an image or video. This method lets AI cause misrecognition, miss objects or recognize objects as different.
The new TikTok surveillance state.
I’m tired of going to a restaurant and having to whisper my shit-talking because I live in fear that one of you people on TikTok is going to post it and tell my friends that her mutuals are talking about her.
My bank knows me as Mr Schaefer.
EBCDIC is incompatible with GDPR.
A customer complained that their bank was spelling the customer's name incorrectly. The bank didn't have support for diacritical marks. (…) The bank refused to spell their customer's name correctly, so the customer raised a GDPR complaint under Article 16.