marcosdumay

You'd use tramp... What is way better than the vim's solution.

Any opinion online about anything that involves large corporations is almost entirely astroturfing.

> barring some niche edge cases

If by "supply and demand" you mean all supplies have positive and reasonably sized elasticity, and all demands have negative and reasonably sized elasticity, through all reasonable price ranges...

Some niche cases include any kind of labor, anything that comes out of a factory with economies of scale, and anything that involves land or extraction of natural resources.

> The webcomponent code seens quite sane to me

If that's a joke, it passed over everybody's head here. I can't imagine it's serious, but it still doesn't sound like a joke to me.

It can't be completely self and cross consistent, it's not possible. But that is exactly the goal, we just can't achieve it.

How do you know if you are breaking the law or not if it's inconsistent? And like the sibling points out, any inconsistency can be abused to declare you guilty or innocent on any behavior depending on the partisanship and interests of the judge.

Does the tower where Gandalf is kept in Lord of the Rings have a name? Is the .com still available?

Except that it doesn't.

All of the stuff available is basically a mix of the elements the author puts on his 8 images on the beginning of the article. Where only 2 of them have fans that can actually vent a room.

There's nothing malicious about the CVE. It lets people use it to index issues, like it was supposed to, and stops dumb people from using it as an indicator of work done or vulnerability level, things that it was never useful for.

And it's the thing responsible for opening your doors...

Until governments stop printing money and sending it directly to people that have nothing to do with it but investing, people will keep inventing random useless stuff to invest into.

Well, the best way to solve this problem keeping it a market system is if consumers band together and create a fab that will supply them.

Since almost everybody is a consumer of those companies, I do suggest we reuse the governance system we have that solves other "everybody problems".

Mix a spoon of oil in a couple of glasses of water, add salt, put it a few minutes in a blender, and tell me how easy it is to retrieve the oil.

Now scale that to millions of barrels of oil every day.

Not exactly "not physically extractable", but extractable only slowly, probably contaminated by water, in a way that is very expensive to refine.

People jump over the details in normal times, but then times get abnormal and impossible things start to happen.

True, but the search fails to reduce the number of options, so some things are right.

Still, the GP is correct about the problems.

Relational databases have exactly 1 type that corresponds to modern data-handling practices: timestamp with time zone, that stores a timestamp. There is no good way to store any other modern type, and the 1980s practices on time handling weren't actually very good.

Those are the change in tax rates between properties. And the wins on that section are about votes to change the tax policy.

Eh... After finishing the article, did I miss the section where the author discuss if Georgism actually works?

Did it actually increase the amount of housing? Reduce wealth disparity? Got enough taxes so cities can make commutes better?

> Many people would want a system which penalizes businesses for buying up e.g. all the veterinarians in a city and charging monopoly prices.

As powerful as taxes are to create change, you don't need to use them to solve every problem out there.

If you click on the article that has actual data, the trend started in 2013 and has been mostly the same since then.

They are doing a very sensible approach of not trying to be the top AI researchers around, and either hiring or using commodity stuff on their products trying to find an application.

That's what basically all big techs should have done. And Oracle too.

Again, I have no idea if they found any good use for it on their applications, but they are the only one integrating it right.

I dunno about people that buy their products. But being behind on AI is absolutely a positive for their stocks.

> I never understood what kind of ergonomics they are supposed to improve.

People like buttons with sharp corners in real things because they are rare and expensive, and buttons with round corners in digital things because they imitate the cheap round buttons that are everywhere.

Now that the round corners have been overused, we may get some fashion of sharp corners again.

AFAIK, US stocks pay back mostly as buy-backs.

The fact that those are so few relative to what dividends would be is a measure of the market's (lack of) health. But it doesn't automatically make the market a Ponzi scheme.

My favorite bug of the .Net connector is how the entire API supports async operations, but the underlying implementation can't tell two different executions of the same query apart, so it's random whether each call will get their own results or some other ones.

But polluting the poll with unusable connections is just Oracle copying the MS-SQL's thing. The C# recommended coding practices will automatically deal with this. (Not that you would want to follow them, but you may want to look and copy this part.)

You can get a Zigbee temp/humidity sensor and throw it inside the fridge.

Yes, Sony has a known history of respecting the user's security...

The cost is decreasing quickly, mostly because the labs stopped competing on quality. At the same time, the costs are enormous, and all labs are very openly subsidizing usage hoping to get enough scale to be profitable (while 1 of them has suspicious unity numbers and can be hiding negative marginal income).

Also, it's impossible that they become cheaper than specialized software. Or even as cheap as them. It's still possible that they become cheap enough that it doesn't matter.

> preventing a dedicated American enemy from getting nuclear weapons

By killing the anti-nuclear leadership of such country and proving their opponents points that only nukes could protect them from the USA...

> They may have learned some or all of these things for python?(please? )

On other languages those things are either obvious because you have to write the behavior yourself, or fail loudly in a way that requires you to learn them before your code will run.

You don't have to hope. The same people that fall to the foot-guns in sh don't make the same mistakes when they write it in python.

Taxing gains on the value of anything used in a contract as collateral is a simple and useful start.