_m8fo

As far as I know they don’t have guarantees. They simply make good on refunding if there’s a downstream issue (e.g. hotel is overbooked).

How has using foundationdb been?

What have been the biggest pros? The biggest cons? Would you use it again (one alternative could have been TikV).

This is a level of support all software companies should aspire to. It's also what the enterprise likes to see and will give you money for.

I’m not sure I understand Apple’s logic here. Are iCloud Photos in their data centers not scanned? Isn’t everything by default for iCloud users sent there automatically to begin with? Doesn’t the same logic around slippery slope also apply to cloud scans?

This is not to say they should scan locally, but my understanding of CSAM was that it would only be scanned on its way to the cloud anyways, so users who didn’t use iCloud would’ve never been scanned to begin with.

Their new proposed set of tools seems like a good enough compromise from the original proposal in any case.

The era you're describing is possible today if you build your own e-bike.

You can pick up a kit from ebikeling which includes standard throttles, hub motors (or mid-drive if you're into that), pedal assist sensors and displays.

You can buy one of thousands of batteries with XT60 connectors or solder one to any battery you'd like.

The Samsung Q990c supports both. Not sure if it's the best, though, but I'm happy with mine.

I recently started collecting 4K UHD Blu-Rays since I got a Samsung Q990c.

The most obvious difference to me is the audio. Though the discs do look better than say Netflix 4K, the audio is way better on my particular setup.

I do wonder if streaming is really the same "atmos" as a 4K Blu-Ray. From my experience there must be some serious compression or misrepresentation.

Will be interested in trying FlexConnect with and without Blu-Ray once it's available for me (though not sure it would be better than my current setup).

I thought the selling point of Tesla was the super fast charging? How long would it take to charge to make up the difference in reported range? Quick Google says a supercharger is up to 200 miles in 15 minutes.

They should fix the reporting though. Ideally let the user put in observed range to calibrate.

For:

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/62185f3b81809a6fd03dd...

Is there supposed to be a line through some of the center?

They should do the same with gas (hybrid) cars - since to be fair there’s a hit there with temperature differences and it would be neat to see the differences.

I also noticed this data is generated from aggregated user data. I wonder how a prolonged ride can affect the range. Could long rides heat the battery enough to offset the issues in cool temps?

Yeah you are right - I thought the primary in this case was distributed since most of the shims were (CouchDB, Mongo, etc).

An interesting idea, but if I’m understanding the problem trying to be solved - might be better suited by durable execution (two examples being Azure’s durable functions, and Temporal.io).

In practice transactions between arbitrary data stores would result in potentially boundless and unpredictable latency, no?

Also, is Postgres strongly consistent and linearizable)? One alternative would be using a database with stronger consistency guarantees (Spanner is but not open source, FoundationDB is but has limitations on transactions unless you implement mvcc yourself, which to be fair you are).

Interesting that the quest 2 wins for Vr headsets even though it’s stand alone.

Unsurprisingly nvidia dominates with gpus.

That’s terrible, sorry for your loss. Thanks for sharing.

Is it that error prone? Could people not just submit what their own opinion and then you aggregate it systematically?

Is there any company that fits your criteria? I can't think of a single company that pays "very well" and does not do questionable things.

EDIT: I do not necessarily mean "questionable" here in a moral sense, more so you disagree with it or find it questionable yourself, however your interests may lie.

Aren't you just begging the question here? Personally I don't see why people take pictures of a lot of things. As for preservation -- if you remember it, is it not preserved? And if you somehow forget, could you not forget that you recorded it?

Unfortunately, in a classist society no one wants to do what they perceive to be "grunt work". The good news is that there's a natural equilibrium that will be met as the waves of graduates see their ROI decrease, save for those who attend a handful of elite universities.

Why does it matter if I have kids or not? Everyone has friends and family. The question remains.

I'm curious -- why do you want to record the moment?

A bus is about 2 to 3 times as long as a car. Unless you're assuming these buses would only have a single passenger, no, they are not a negative.

And even if all of these people lived in walking distance of where they worked, the places they've now vacated would be occupied with people who may drive, and so forth.

The imaginary world you're supposing does not exist, hence the article we're discussing to begin with.

Sure, but how would they get to work if there were no buses? A fraction of them would drive, no? Buses are a net positive.

How would buses contribute to the problem? Assuming every person who takes the bus would otherwise drive, a single bus would wipe out dozens of cars on the roads.

Is it not possible to do hub-and-spoke with buses? That would cut the commute drastically without any infrastructure required. Buy the buses, find the optimum routes and go.

> Another problem is how we're supposed to decide what people need. Why not just give people money and let them decide what they need. You'll need some system to handle those who fail to satisfy their basic needs due to problems of mental health (including addiction), but most people are better at deciding what they need for themselves than a bureaucrat is.

Sure. However there are concerns to where this money would come from and how much should be given.

> All you need do is prove citizenship

Isn't this ripe for fraud as well?

Your rebuttals are implementation details. The questions remains, as an abstract idea, is it better to give everyone money or give those who need things the things they need?

Thanks for the reply:

1. This is an implementation problem. Hardly inherent to the idea.

2. Sure there are administrative costs. There also costs to giving everyone X amount of money, especially when a large percentage of them don't need it to begin with.

3. Indeed there is fairness. However since everyone receives it everyone's relative position is unchanged. So the question is, if giving everyone money somehow helps everyone, why not give everyone more? To what point does this end?

> Forgive me if this wasn't your intention, but it seems like you're asserting that poorer people are uniquely unable to determine their needs?

I'm asserting people in general are unable to determine their needs. Every year worldwide consumer debt just keeps going up and up. This would imply either an inability to save or insufficient wages, right? UBI would increase the wages, but it's not clear to me why things wouldn't become more expensive.

> The amount you give people relative to their income in aggregate affects the economy, right? If you gave everyone $12,000 a year, the consequences would be vastly different than if you gave everyone $12,000,000,000,000 a year.

Sure, but regardless of the amount. Why not give them twice as much? Ultimately UBI is fiscally absurd.

Nothing about what I said inherently disincentivizes work.

I've never really understood basic income. Why give everyone free money? Why not just give the people who need things the things they need?

Is this really an economic problem or a cultural one? Just decide on what everyone should have and how much and then find those who lack those things and give it to them.

EDIT: the responses below are interesting but unconvincing. Why wouldn't giving everyone X amount raise all prices by X?

In a world with targeted advertising and unprecedented advertising I'm confident basic income would be counter productive.

If giving everyone X works, why not 2X? 3X? Lastly, where is the money for this scheme coming from and why would anyone who doesn't need it agree to this?