2nd paragraph starts with: "We used Claude and Allium"
And later on: "With that obligation written down, Claude traced every path that runs after gyros_busy is set to true"
1,013 karma · joined September 28, 2020
2nd paragraph starts with: "We used Claude and Allium"
And later on: "With that obligation written down, Claude traced every path that runs after gyros_busy is set to true"
A handful of student's expenditure covers a teacher's salary. Where does the expenditure for the other 25 kids in the class go?
Companies like terraform industries are doing something similar, but creating natural gas. With enough cheap solar, all hydrocarbons are pretty much on the table as well.
It'll be a decade or more until this is scaled up and not dependent on subsidies.
S-curves are hard to predict. Basically every time someone attempts to do it, they are way off. This [0] is a neat paper that addresses the question. We've blown past every single prediction.
[0] https://www.inet.ox.ac.uk/files/energy_transition_paper-INET...
When the public (and even policy makers who know should know better) see these numbers, they fairly assume that the sources are being measured by the same criteria.
It is so blatantly dishonest.
>> don't take it seriously enough.
A serious comparison would be to schools in fairly well off neighbourhoods in the suburbs. But they don't do that.
Charter schools do this by various selection effects, and artificial barriers, like ending at noon on a Wednesday. So the only kids who go there have two parents, one who probably is stay at home and can pick the kid up.
The same type of thing is in play in military schools. There will be few-to-no kids of poor single moms. All the kids will be well fed and groomed and socialized. Is the education better, or have they just selected better performing kids? The article touches on this. But I don't think takes it nearly seriously enough.
The number is the US is similar, and has been rising.
I'm not so sure about the article though. There is a simpler explanation: Albini will act in the way that pisses off religious right wingers the most. When that meant being rude and vulgar, he did so in the most over the top ways. When it means self flagellation for being a white male and "making space" for others, he will do that. You can be sure that however culture evolves in the next 20 years, he'll be doing whatever enrages Fox News the most.
You don't have to be that old to remember how terrible the experience used to be, and how easily even sophisticated individuals were ripped off at every point of the process.
But they absolutely do have the skills to shape the narrative. And In this case they failed spectacularly. Many seemed overly eager to attack and destroy any who came to a different conclusion. It seems like they took glee in it. Their behaviour was embarrassing, and there appears to have been very little acknowledgement or self reflection of this.