ProcNetDev

The population of old cars that you see driving around today is very different from the population of old cars that ever existed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

Maybe we could solve the collective action problem, if Apple stopped making half the population think they are using SMS when they are actually using iMessage.

Are you available to provide tech support to help my grandma install WhatsApp?

Synergy works with multi-monitor (for me at least). I've been using it for close to two decades. Outside of the Linux kernel, it is probably the single piece of software I've used the longest.

The idea that Blackrock brought all the homes has reached the level of what I'd call "TikTok truth", ie. an idea that feels so true that reality can't compete. Can I ask you why you find it convincing?

I found this Derek Thompson article informed my thinking on the subject:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/06/blackrock-...

Maybe there is something inherently wrong with a system of centralized ownership if it always seems to get taken over by authoritians?

Home assistant with zigbee, z-wave, or tasmota/esphome devices is pretty great.

China keeps saying pretty clearly that they plan to take back Taiwan forcefully.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/xi-jinping-says...

Not our fault that the Taiwanese people don't want to end up in forced labor camps.

The residents of culdesac have to sign a lease that states that they are not allowed to park on the streets. This was a condition of the city to allow the zoning variance for culdesac.

Not owning a car is different from never riding in a car. That money not spent on parking every month can buy a lot of ride shares.

Allowing access to city services (street parking) based on land ownership (or lack there of) seems (to me, a software engineer, not a lawyer) like a violation of the equal protection clause.

I think the relevant case is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arlington_County_Board_v._Rich...

Where the SCOTUS said yeah this is bad but it's okay because we want to encourage non-homeowners to take the bus. This was decided before there was lots of clear research on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand

Allowing homeowners free and easily accessible on street parking encourages more car ownership.

They ditched personal vehicles. Not owning a car is different than not having mobility. They aren't hermits.

Owning a personal car and mobility are different things. You can meet people and hang out with them, without owning a car.

The framing of this story is so weird (and I think meant to trigger conspiracy nuts.)

The story of culdesac is about parking not about banning mobility!

Parking is insanely expensive to build. The only way the city would let them not build parking was for residents to agree to not own cars. (I think this is a clear 14th amendment violation but thats just me.)

Read Henry Garbar's new book for the full story on parking: https://www.npr.org/2023/05/09/1174962751/paved-paradise-exa...

Or you could leave.

The post is cool art but ice fishing tents work well in the Denver safe outdoor spaces.

https://www.coloradovillagecollaborative.org/safe-outdoor-sp...

You can rent an apartment in Tokyo on a min wage salary.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/11/opinion/editorials/tokyo-...

https://resources.realestate.co.jp/rent/tokyo-budget-apartme...

Whats their secret? Sane zoning laws created at the federal level that separate industrial use from residential, but don't segregate humans based on race or class.

Seems like a convenient scapegoat to distract from the problem that we don't build as many houses as we used to:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/01/housing-cr...

There are dozens of us! This looks nice and the UI is better than I would have done. Good job, OP. I guess I can stop running my GPU every night.

I might still try to release a nice bundled-up docker container that can STT a podcast RSS into a text RSS. Some podcasts are enjoyable to listen to, but some I just want to skim the text.

SQL is fine.

But as an engineer, I much prefer getting a notebook over a 1000-line plate of SQL spaghetti.

Some of our data scientists prefer SQL and that's fine. We figure out how to speed it up and ship it.

But I've gotten a few of them onto the PySpark+notebook train and it is just a much more productive way of working, IMO. We can extract things into functions with docs & linting. We can easily look at intermediate sub-queries. Yes, you "can" do all the in SQL but the open-source tooling for Python is just really nice.

As far as comment wars go this a been very civil. Thanks! :) This will be my last reply in this thread but I wanted to try to make the case against conservative populism one more time.

  Don't impute principles to the market.

I'm not saying the market has principles. People can be moral or immoral. As you have noted, the market is amoral. I was saying that the debate over who can say what and where they can say it can be solved by the market. Twitter owns their severs and can decide what they want to do with them. You don't have the right to compel them to allow you to use their severs. You are free to build (or rent) your own servers and scream into the void. No one is obligate to listen to you but you are free to provide them something of value in return for their attention.

  Those companies wouldn't touch gay rights with a 10 foot pole until one day all of a sudden they're beating their way to the front of the line at the pride parade. 

This is very true and it should be of great concern to conservatives. In the previous generations, conservatives had a lock on the culture war but since the 90s they have completely ceded the field to progressives and liberals.

Republicans have only won the popular vote for president once since 1990. Trump isn't even attempting to win the popular vote this year. The median income in 2018 was 10k higher in blue states than red states. And you wonder why advertisers (and thus twitter) value blue tribe users more?

Conservatives can't gerrymander the market. They are going to need to find a way to compete for relevance with the majority of the public not just their base.

  They'll follow what's popular, and if that's liquidating jews, they'll do it (some of them did!).

This is a straw-man. No one is in favor of letting billionaires commit extrajudicial killings. The right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is higher in my principle stack than the rights of market forces.

In conclusion, I will say there is a way out of this morass for conservatives. They have to kick the neo-nazis, the proud boys, and qanon out of the party. They have to accept science and that the scientific method is the best way to determine objective reality. If they continue to call anything that falls outside of their accepted narratives "fake news", they will continue to lose the culture war. And thus, be more and more sidelined from the national discourse. Due the undemocratic elements of our constitution they conservatives may retain political power, but in the end, the consent of the governed is more important.

  Maybe there's a higher principle here than partisan warfare?

You're going to call me a neoliberal shill ;) but I'd say my higher principle is the market. There is a reason why Nestle, Version, and Disney spend loads of money on twitter and not on gab. Nestle doesn't want chocolate chip ads next to holocaust denial. So yes if twitter decided that pissing off their liberal users grossed more revenue I'm fine with it.

Sounds like twitter is doing a good job of keeping it's user base happy :) and I would argue that not spreading disinformation is part of keeping them happy.

Other companies/platforms are free to advertise or offer services to entice users to switch. As conservatives like to remind us money is speech. You are not entitled to someone else's attention but you can try to buy it.

Some of twitter's users see them as complicit in spreading disinformation. So it does cost them something of value to do nothing. It costs them their reputation with some segment of users. Twitter is making a judgement call. They think pissing off some conservatives by banning this link will net them more good will from other users.

On the morals of it; I think that if twitter thinks that banning all conservatives will make them more revenue they can and should be allowed to do it. My value statement would hold equally if you :s/conservatives/liberals/g.

Conservative lawmakers have become very found of the Obama quote, "Elections have consequences." Well, the culture war has consequences too. And conservatives have completely gotten their asses kicked in the culture war in the last 30 years. Due to anachronisms in our means of determining representation this has not translated into a loss of legislative power. But if they want to hold sway outside of Washington they will have to make an effort to win back the hearts and minds of the public and more importantly the American consumer.

So if @Jack solely owned twitter it would be ok? I don't see how being on the NYSE makes the morals any different. If anything having a board of directors and shareholders makes TWTR more democratic not less.

I guess I just don't see twitter as a monopoly. I lived a long time before they existed and I hope/suspect I will live a long time after they are a major player in the news cycle. (Lets just say I'm not long twitter.)

I think creating new platforms has actually gotten easier since twitter's inception. Back in the day it was almost magical to have a website that performed at scale. Now you just hand a credit card to your favored cloud provider.

In your metaphor I see the internet as the utility not the platform provider. If akamai or level 3 decide that they wouldn't carry your traffic, then you might have a case that you're being censored.

If Apple can keep Epic out of the app store then @Jack can ban whomever he damn well feels like.

Sorry I just fail to understand the conservatives' values here. They will go to the supreme court to fight for their right not to sell cupcakes to gay people but then turn around and demand to control what twitter does with their servers.

Big citation needed on that. I highly doubt twitter's user base is 40% Republican-trump supporters. Only 20% of their use base in is in the US. And Republicans need to remember that because of the electoral college their electoral wins do not mean there is a silent majority of supporters out there.

Half the country isn't going to out looking for conspiracy theory garbage. They just want to see pictures of their grandkids. But if you expose them to the conspiracies they can get drawn in.

You can still publish! AWS and cloudflare will happily take your money if you're not a neonazi. If you are a neonazi, A) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTs_Q4hEqmA B) you can find some mom-and-pop co-lo that will take your money. AFAIK, 8chan is still serving page views.