Same pattern as when Japanese auto manufacturers first entered US/EU markets.
They were initially a joke.
Now: not so much.
269 karma · joined March 22, 2021
They were initially a joke.
Now: not so much.
Apple should be completely free to charge as they like for their toolchain.
But other toolchains will arise. And Apple's doesn't half stand on the shoulder of others.
https://www.smmt.co.uk/vehicle-data/car-registrations/
January data: BEV share +20% YoY
"During NASA's Space Shuttle program, which was carried out from 1977 to 2011, more than 24,500 tons of liquid hydrogen were purchased, of which 54.6% was used on-board; the rest was lost during storage, loading, or replenishment"
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20110008561/downloads/20...
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/why-liquid-hydrogen-dumbass-p...
That sort of counterparty will abuse you -- like dropping your salary just as you're about to sign.
Everything is a negotiation.
I'm not sure that's going to fly. My understanding is that the DMA, like the DMCA, applies to EU citizens wherever they happen to be.
(https://s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/document-api-images-live....
Wires are a messy, pain in the ass. I switched to a bluetooth keyboard as soon as I could and have never looked back.
As someone childfree by choice, I care about the preservation of the global west for, at most, the next 40 years.
As you say (and the original article points out) - whether it's economically a good idea depends a lot on the electric:gas price ratio, which currently is around 3.2, so the COP needs to exceed 2.95 or so for the OPEX to be lower (let alone the CAPEX of having the thing installed in the first place). And historically the gap has been even larger - nearly 5:1, meaning the gain would have to be 4.56 even to break even - "somewhat ambitious"!
I think it's a tragedy that they aren't more popular. One of the reasons is that they don't qualify for installation grants. This in turn means the installers (ahem, grant-harvesters) are bad-mouthing them vs air-water to potential customers.
I've been saying the things in this report for years. Nobody I know is particularly attached to gas as a method of heating their home, they simply want to do it at the lowest cost possible. Make heat pumps have an ROI of less than 10 years and it'll change overnight.
The UK government keeps banging the drum of heat pumps, then navel-gazing when the public won't install them. This is not because - outside of a few anti-green nutbars - they don't think they work, it's because they can see no economic case for them to do so. Making comparisons to countries with different unit prices doesn't help. Instead of the wildly complex subsidy scheme (Which merely funds a grant-harvesting installation industry, at the expense of viable systems like air-air), simply moving green tariffs to sit exclusively on gas would make a big difference.
One comparison this report misses is against variable electric tariffs (eg Octopus Agile which has 1/2 hr pricing). I suspect the gap would narrow, but I don't know by how much, and doing that you're taking a bet about the average electric unit cost in the future vs gas. My guess here - and it's the same reason I currently don't think a battery system is investable - is that the difference between 'cheap' periods and 'expensive' periods is going to narrow as time-of-use tariffs encourage the significant extra demand from EVs away from peak-load times.
a) involves an incredible amount of DRY in the specs (to the extend we tinkered with a DSL to generate the openapi which feels wrong) b) doesn't have very good ways of splitting large files up and c) is YAML which is horrible. (Yes, JSON too, but that's even worse for authoring).
I can see if you're trying to describe an existing API with OpenAPI there are enhancements here which you will welcome.
If you're using OpenAPI to develop new APIs, I've come to the conclusion of "don't. Use GraphQL". After initially worrying about over-fetching and N+1 stuff, and thinking "yeah GraphQL for the front end, but the serious stuff should be OpenAPI" I've ditched that. GQL Federation was the final nail; it /does/ force some conversations up the chain (how exactly ought two, supposedly completely independent APIs, federate) but in practice this is a useful attribute.
This is why car adverts are either belting round implausibly empty urban streets, or of Wankpanzers off-roading in a way almost no owner will actually do. "Buy this and this is the experience you're connecting with".
I'm rather confused by the article's point. It really reinforces that it's all experience, and really, material goods are just a means to an end.
Look - if I want to go experience Bali, it's not like I have to buy an aeroplane to do so. We _vastly_ overestimate the marginal utility of a more expensive car or some slightly different shoes in the sense of what additional experiences it's going to give us.
And, frankly, if you're claiming your shoe purchases increase your wellbeing because they don't hurt then I might suggest you pay more attention to purchasing the correct size for your feet (Stop buying from the Dolmansaxlil shoe corporation).
ISTR that materialistic humans being on a hedonic treadmill has quite a lot of evidence.
When I watch those programs which celebrate the 'glamour' and 'lifestyle' of these people, all I wish for is a small suitcase nuke that could improve the world overnight.
E.g: I can't hire developers! Nobody wants to work! (Actuality: Nobody wants to spend £7k/pa to commute into your central London office for no good reason)
Chris Snowden demolishes it here: https://snowdon.substack.com/p/is-drinking-never-good-for-pe...
> Notice, by the way, that nobody involved in this research is recommending that teetotallers over the age of 40 should start drinking moderately, despite the study showing that this would improve their health. Even in the world of 'public health', fanaticism has its limits.
https://medium.learningbyshipping.com/creating-the-future-of...
This really resonated with me:
"It will be tempting for some to continue to believe we will return to the old normal and operate as we once did.
It will be tempting for others to search for a few changes and make those permanent and hope the rest will go back to normal.
Still others will firmly believe that some approach that picks the best changes and just adds them to what was going on will be the path to the future.
If these patterns sound familiar it is because they are the patterns of a failed response to a disruptive change. The idea that everything stays the same except for a few changes around the edges caused every incumbent to lose in the face of step-function change."But you trigger an interesting question. Frankly, part of my value to an organisation /is/ the accrued scar tissue from working with exciting technology; "choose boring technology" has us greybeards nodding along as at least half our job is about saying "no" to things - by being good at making the value judgements about when something shiny is worth it, and to be worried about those unknown-unknowns as you're gonna get the call when it breaks at 3AM on a weekend.
But: We're clearly not learning from this. Maybe if we don't let people burn themselves they won't discover the stove is hot? Is this just the way of things, or a function of the fact that older engineers are steadily driven out into 'management', and the industry keeps re-inventing the wheel every 5 years?
And a good answer might be "all providers don't have that capability" and/or "providers can't efficiently answer questions about that, such as 'find me all things with this configuration tag'.
In your example, those two users wouldn't have the same tags, because you'd arrange it so that they didn't - either by user or a resource grouping based on the configuration itself. This is the choice made by some other tooling, for better or worse.
One problem, as mentioned in a sibling comment, is if you don't have state then how do you know a resource has been deleted? One other option might be a system that compares the "desired state" from the previous version of the config. That might be an interesting approach - keeping a history of config. But that is, of course, state :)
I use TF a bit. I want to like it, but I do spend inordinate amounts of time faffing around with state files to make them match reality, and I'm not even doing particularly complex stuff. I'm told other tooling (eg: Bicep for Azure) dispenses with state entirely.
"Nobody preaches about the sun coming up tomorrow. Nobody preaches about certainties. Believers preach about their world view not because they are certain, but because they are UNcertain"
I.E: What people like this are trying to do isn't convince you - it's to convince themselves.
If you choose another path, be it in work, decision to start or not start a family, from the mainstream you get pushback in many forms, because it's very hard for people to not want the choices that they make to be the _correct_ choices, and that must mean the _correct_ choices apply to everyone, right? We can all get trapped on the hedonic treadmill together!
There's a bit of this in the WFH/Office debate, too.
Best advice I ever got: If you want to be happier, get poorer friends.