Also worth pointing out that when the census can't collect individualized data, they estimate it based on existing government data. The quality of data varies significantly depending on the local government, and pretty much all governments were struggling to figure out the current state of things during the pandemic.
You can constrain the plane it goes on because there's only a small number of flights between city pairs with a given carrier.
You also can't buy a plane ticket for an anonymous person. It has to be for a legal person, which the government is informed of before the flight takes place. That ID is attached to the luggage when it's checked, which is how they can implement bag retrieval when the passenger doesn't board. I'm sure there's an airline somewhere out there accepting checked bags without tickets or ID, but it's not supposed to be allowed.
For air cargo, someone provides an ID, but it's usually the shipper or some other person with no real involvement beyond working in the supply chain. There's a chain of check boxes that says "I received this from an entity I have a legitimate business relationship with" and that's good enough in practice.
How is ensuring checked bags have boarded passengers not also theater? Airlines openly sell unattended cargo space on passenger flights and it's screened the same way as checked luggage.
It helps avoid the happy path effect. You're always handling something and there's no hidden control flow from the program runtime creeping in because of the cases you missed.
Someone recently made the point to me that a lot of dynamic situations can be rewritten as locally static allocations with proper continuations. The idea being that you re-enter the continuation with more memory when you've exhausted your existing pools. The problems are obvious, but it's a neat middle ground.
Even things like fast food or Walmart are a testament to the abundance the US has
You can get similarly fatty foods in most corners of the world. Doesn't matter if you're deep in central Asia or Africa, any urban settlement will have a restaurant that sells them and most of the roadside stations too.
Supermarkets are pretty American, but that's not true for the same reason it might have been in Yeltsin's day. I think you'd have trouble making a serious argument that communities with Tesco are fundamentally poorer or worse off than those with Walmart.
American megastores with 60,000+ SKUs are just a cultural preference in North America, and not even a universal one at that. Costco is very successful both domestically and internationally by rejecting that model. Trader joes (Aldi) is extremely competitive in the US despite a blatantly European business model. Americans are far more excited for either one of those to move in than a Walmart.
I suspect you'd have fewer downvotes if you had simply said "everything is political" instead of bringing up a contentious topic that isn't obviously related.
It's pretty easy to see how it happens. People don't intuitively understand compound interest and defer.
You're supposed to start saving during the most financially constrained portion of your life, and those are the dollars that have the most impact on your nest egg. Imagine someone starts investing $100/mo at 20 for 3% annually. Their friend who starts saving the same amount at 30 will have 30% more money, despite putting in almost as much.
A person whose parents gave them $10k for retirement at 20 and only starts investing at 30 will have as much as the person who invested religiously from 20, while a person who managed both will have double.
"America first, not only" was Obama's policy [0], not Trump's. The US wouldn't be starting trade wars with its oldest, closest allies if the current executive believed in multipolarity.
What's the purpose of a map if not to reflect how people actually refer to and interact with these features? Disputed borders are handled that way because people inside those countries have understandings of "their" borders (and it's politically convenient for the companies involved). The term "Lake America" isn't in active use as a geographic referrant, so there's no point reflecting it in a map beyond the political convenience.
GMaps can be extremely slow when it comes to responding to user reports, or updating regional info like road networks or new subdivisions. A lot of that comes down to the fact that Google relies on government entities for authoritative information, which can mean waiting months or years for the local government to provide new info. The federal government updated this one quickly.
It's partially a product of the widespread availability of LLMs. Criminal organizations that would previously have been limited by the language fluency, scale, or technical competence of the labor available to them can now use LLMs to supplement their operations. It's also helping them target new populations that you're more likely to be in alongside traditional victims like the elderly, the desperate, previous victims, etc. They're pretty slow to adopt new technologies, so scam usage is still ramping up.
It's less specified than rust. For example, you can bind references to individual collection elements here. It doesn't seem to prohibit borrowing a dynamically indexed element either, which is one hell of a static analysis lift. Seems like you can also have simultaneous references to distinct static indices (e.g. &mut arr[0] and &mut arr[1]) as long as you don't do invalidating operations, which isn't expressible in NLL or polonius. That's feasible for a borrowchecker at least.
Can you point out where? Looking at the METR report, the only place I see discussion of humans being involved in the sequence of events is two short paragraphs on page 30 where a security investigation into the artifactory issues led to a pause before ExploitGym experiments were resumed. There's no deeper analysis on what was found during that investigation, nor why training was resumed even though the issues weren't mitigated. Another part discusses The agents choosing not to actively email a human researcher, but not the human researchers actively looking for evasion.
I think both the OpenAI and METR discussions, while interesting, miss the more important context: what were the humans doing in all this? This was a structural failure of a human organization, but the analysis focuses almost exclusively on the agency of machines, not the institutional systems that failed to police them. The humans and their own agency/involvement is essentially omitted from the story and subsequent reporting. I suspect the omission is actually a result of company/industry myopia to human factors analysis, but it dovetails amazingly well with the marketing narrative.
I've noticed exactly the opposite with other kinds of lenders. Refinancing and renegotiation is optimized to the hilt, but the payments system seems to have an SLA of zero 9s.
How do you trust the results of a black box that are hard to verify? Most of us use proxies that are easier to check, like historical competence and maturity. For example, it's difficult to verify my compiler produces a binary that correctly implements the code I wrote. I can partially validate the result with testing, but when I send it out into the world to handle unknown inputs I'm trusting that the compiler has done its job correctly. I can have that trust because I know the compiler people (in aggregate) have thought very hard about correctness, and the project is mature enough that bugs are rare. If the GCC developers tomorrow were to start merging anything that passed the test suite and some other list of objective metrics, my trust would rightly decrease.
"Just do multi-cloud" is burying the lede a bit. Monzo is a bank, so it's not a given that they can easily partition all their operations into fully independent cells. I'm reasonably confident that teams of average competence could implement a second system for failover. I'm much less confident in teams of average competence doing complicated distributed systems work correctly, and doing it incorrectly is potentially existential risk for a bank.
0.8% at the size of the EU economy is a huge win. It's slightly smaller than Denmark's fossil fuel emissions. Though, the savings are presumably calculated over several years while Denmark produces it every single year.
First if you us the convention center, you place the housing center off of where most of the housing actually is.
Convention centers are usually downtown. Mean population centers reflect the surrounding geography and can drift pretty far from an "idealized" circular urban area. My area's is out on an island for example, nowhere near downtown. Jackson county's is east of Raytown. I'm not sure why you'd specifically want to live within 20 minutes of the mean population center, so it wasn't the obvious interpretation of your original statement.
Between $175k and $350k center on KCMO alone there are over 760 results.
No, there are 17 results once you filter for 2+ acres. Most of them are mislabeled or unimproved property. If you filter those out too (because this is a housing discussion), what remains within 20-30ish minutes are the two I linked.
I realize multiple acres of land is a bit of a silly requirement, but you're the one who suggested there are tons of houses with "several acres within 20 minute drive to a lot of US city downtown areas". That's why I was surprised.
I picked the convention center as city center (union station would also be a reasonable choice) and I was only able to find 2 improved lots under $300k. Notably, neither is quite 3+ acres or within 20 minutes of the things you listed, and both are on septic. And this is in a metro where home prices are 36% below national median.
Didn't realize google earth's performance had gotten that bad, but yeah, you can clearly see the V shape there. You can see the U shape in the hanging valleys on the higher slopes as well as further up where the main waterway originates, but whatever form the lower regions might have had after the last LGM has been reshaped by erosion.
Can you ground the discussion by mentioning what you think these cities are? Taking Columbus, OH as the most average of American cities and a 20m isochrone map from city center, there are currently 0 parcels for sale with 3+ ("several") acres under $300k. There are a few within 30m drive, one of which even has a possibly habitable structure. The rest are bare agricultural land you'd need additional investment to actually live on.
Probably not. Most alpine valleys were carved by glaciers and have a characteristic U-shaped profile. When you get a landslide into a glacial valley, it hits the relatively flat floor and breaks itself apart. The valleys themselves are usually wide enough that they don't dam either. The alps also have significantly less relief than the Himalayas.
The valley where the floods occurred in Nepal has a V-shape, and the peaks around it have much more relief. It's much easier for a large landslide to fill the bottom, creating a dam that can burst, or just continue down the valley without wasting all its energy on a broad flat plain at the bottom. The upper valley immediately below the cliff face that toppled was also a glacial U-shaped valley though, so this speculation might need adjustment as more work is done.
It's worth emphasizing just how much less monitored and dangerous Nepal's mountains are though. The (greater) Himalayas are unlike any other mountain ranges I've ever seen.
That's the parent's argument. Prevailing wage in country A is X. Prevailing wage in country B is Y, and according to your numbers X > 2Y. Person from country B emigrates to country A and accepts wage 1.9Y, putting downward pressure on the jobs in country A at wage X.
Just because you can theoretically write equivalent code in both languages doesn't mean two idiomatic implementations in each language will be 1:1 with each other. I haven't looked at the code in question, but some examples of common differences:
A C++ program might do template metaprogramming at compile time and the same thing at runtime in Rust, or vice versa. The C++ version might use virtual functions that rust wouldn't use. The Rust version might simply give more optimization information to the backend. The C++ version might use fairly awful parts of the stdlib like iostreams or shared_ptr that rust simply implements better. Etc.
Or maybe they're just focused on the rust implementation as they should be.
I get what you mean that pop hist. books aren't academic, but "narrative warfare" describes a huge proportion of historical scholarship. Whether or not you agree with it, that's the whole point of Metahistory and the linguistic turn.