rmah

>> There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.

Except for package management, of course. There, we need lots and lots of ways.

It doesn't matter how accurate the models are, it's not a "data set" (in the scientific sense), it's more of a conclusion set. Maybe the conclusions are spot on. Maybe not. I have no idea.

As I read it, he's not denying the effects either. He's just saying that not everything bad that happens wrt climate and weather is due to "climate change". Sometimes, it's just variations, which have always happened.

This might be true if there were any actual deep-sea mining companies. By which I mean companies that actually do deep-sea mining and not just talk about doing it. Second, someone else asserted that the study was funded by one of these "deep sea mining" companies. So who the hell knows?

If I may be so bold, it resonates (with you, with me, with most people) because the idea that one can make revolutionary discoveries that contradicts the status quo as an outsider is an inherently attractive idea. It scratches many emotional itches: tweaking the nose of "the man"; suspicion of institutions; being an unknown hero (before the discovery); discovering one's inherent, but unrecognized, greatness; and more.

But the reality of the matter is that for every Krapivin, there are thousands of other people who tried but did not. And more importantly, there are hundreds of others who did the work, gained the foundational knowledge, and THEN made a discovery that changed how we think about the world even if only a tiny bit. While it's not as romantic, it's the way reality works. Mostly.

It sounds like Krapivin is continuing his education. And hopefully his hard work will hone his brilliance and help him to make even more discoveries in the future.

I don't really see how that's a disagreement.

It's not useless because some people will lie and cheat. Over the years, I've interviewed hundreds of people and a substantial minority could not write even the simplest code. Many will say they would be able to filter out such people after a conversation. But, IMO, the fact that they are still able to get hired at some places shows how wrong that often is.

But companies don't pay high salaries for the 80% mundane and easy tasks you do day to day. They pay for the 20% that is challenging and especially for that 1% of problems that occur only once every few months or years. If that 80% was 100% of the job then the company could pay 1/2 to 1/3rd the amount by outsourcing it.

My 7 year old iphone lasts almost two days if I don't do anything too taxing (i.e. video). I don't think I do anything special. I guess YMMV.

It's not capitalism, per se. It's a society that overvalues individualism and devalues family. IMO, of course. One part of the social compact used to be that in return for parents taking care of you as a child, you took care of them when they were old. It worked for literally 1000's of generations.

We replaced those servants with machines. A vacuum cleaner, washer/dryer, various kitchen appliances, etc all save huge amounts of time. There was a BBC show called "1900 House" which just shows how much labor went into maintaining a large home.

I would disagree. Every formula you enter into a cell is "code". Moreover, more complex worksheets require VBA.

Call me cynical but I suspect a lot of "errors" and "mistakes" in architectural diagrams are done on purpose so as to communicate specific points or to emphasize a certain perspective.

This is already almost true. Only 8% of the American workforce is in manufacturing and about 29% of China's (and about 1/7th is exports to the US). I'd guess that that somewhere around 12% to 15% are needed to manufacture all goods for an advanced economy. Another 2% or so for agriculture. Not really much more to go.

It's not about references. It's about building a network of colleagues who respect you and your work. Many years ago, when I started doing consulting/contracting work, literally all my of my jobs came through people I had previously worked for or with across a variety of companies. And if you play your cards right, as the years roll on, you won't even have to apply for jobs other than as a formality. Instead, people who's respect you've gained will try to bring you into where they work.

Well, now you probably understand that Trump is not really anti-drug/anti-cartel. Nor do I think he's pro-drug/pro-cartel. I think he doesn't actually care except in how those issues affect his political career and public profile. Many of Trump's more ... let's call them "random" seeming statements and actions make much more sense if you look at them through the lens of "he doesn't actually care one way or the other".

That people almost always self-organize into structured organizations gives me hope for humanity. Social structures provide people with means to make life easier. They provide support and a guide on how to accomplish things without having to worry about all the details or the "big picture". And, of course, no organization is perfect. Hoping for perfection is not only folly, it is the enemy of good.

They were hedging:

https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2023/09/20/chinese-balloon-n...

Honestly, "sensors" means anything from cameras to thermometers. Either way, the balloon was recovered by the US Navy. It wasn't a spy balloon.

Fine, here https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2023/09/20/chinese-balloon-n...

The Chinese "spy balloon" that it turned out wasn't a spy balloon (according to the pentagon)? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66062562

Typically, you won't be able to make any trades for hours after the info is released anyway.

How will the Australian government compel such companies to comply?

I purposefully did not state my feelings on the matter.

There is no need to be hyperbolic. The US has regularly deported up to 1/2 a million people per year for over a decade until 2020 or so. Some years, the number of deportations exceeded 2 mil. This policy is just a return to the status quo.

https://ohss.dhs.gov/topics/immigration/yearbook/2019/table3...

He's using the term "nation state" in the political science sense, not in the colloquial sense of a political entity that encompasses a people (nation). The very concept of a modern nation-state is, as tomcam stated, quite new. Before that, loyalty was primarily given to people (individuals or families) rather the state as an abstract concept. Empires like Rome touched on the concept as far as we can tell from historical sources, it was fairly different from the concepts of patriotism today.

14,975,435MWh for one year (8760 hrs) = 1709 MW load. Or about 1.7 mil servers using 1kW each (total, including its share of data center cooling). That's a lotta servers.

Another way to look at it.. they say they have about 3.14 bil daily active users across all platforms. So that's about 13Wh per daily user session. At $0.15/kWh, that's about $0.002 of electricity which doesn't seem that horrible.

I fail to see what the idle rich have to do with supply/demand. Vulture capitalists buying and breaking up companies is very much in line with supply/demand (in the financial markets). As are non-competes (malicious or otherwise) which directly effect the supply of skilled labor. Discrimination based on non-utility factors directly influences supply/demand and thus influence prices of all sorts of things.

Economic theory around supply & demand simply describe how economies work. It does not imply that it will lead to a better life for all. In short, the "law" of supply & demand is about price discovery and resource allocation efficiency. It has no moral or ethical component that you seem to feel it implies.

Just a few quick calculations to make it more relatable...

They say the smallest sphere of freshwater lakes and rivers amounts to 93,113 cu km. There are 1 bil cu m per cu km. With a global population of 8.2 bil people, that comes to 11,355 cu m per person. That's a 22.5 meter wide/deep/tall cube (or about 7 or 8 stories tall building).

If we use the sphere that includes groundwater, 10,633,450 cu km. Then we end up with 1,296,762 cu m or a 109m wide cube per person.

I read the first few pages and couldn't figure out what it actually does. All it talks about is how it "works" without saying what "works" means to the users of the device. Very frustrating.

Those who are disagreeing with the author seem to not realize that he's just engaging in a bit of navel-gazing wordplay. Sort of like when people say "good programmers should be lazy". What they really mean is that good programmers should think ahead and craft their code with an eye minimizing future modifications.

Similarly, I think the author is simply saying that well written, easy to read, easy to understand code shouldn't have to be re-read multiple times by the same person. Which is good. The inverse would be that difficult to understand code would have to be read, re-read and studied deeply to actually grok. And thus read a lot. Which is bad.