wwqrd

> where are the 100 year improvements in the status quo of software?

Most software work is just churn / doing the same thing over and over. More productivity can just mean more output, not better output.

What was the book?

The inverse was true for me, at 40 I realised a lot of doors are now closed or closing.

per capita is a bit weird, maybe people in the UK don't drive as much.

How long till it gets added to https://killedbymozilla.com/?

This guy is really churning out awesome projects right now (or at least the videos for them).

I got his satellite clock kit for the office and love it!

Maybe it's a scale thing. If you are sologeneer working on your own project, with a singular vision, making tools to make your life simpler is a no-brainer.

If you are implementing a feature for stakeholders on a large piece enterprise software, you don't necessarily have knowledge or understanding of helper tools from earlier work, so that's extra overhead to understand anything non-standard. Then when the stakeholders change direction (as they often do), any assumptions in your code may need to be upheld while implementing the next feature.

Edit: This is also why it's nice to use widely adopted libraries and frameworks for any helper code. That way a new starter has a chance of understanding what's going on.

For this to work I think the assumption is that the benefit of gerrymandering is less than the "anyone who doesn't like the in power guys" effect. e.g. % of disgruntled swing voters.

TLDR; More volume per session/week = more growth?

So really it becomes a balance of maximising volume against sustainable recovery.

> People rarely stop in the middle of a road

How rarely? How does it compare to self driving cars per km driven?

Totally agree. If human drivers make more mistakes per km than autopilot then what sense does it make to stop self-driving cars?

Maybe? I think the problem is does a small entity like a person or a start up have the resources to make that fight with a big entity? Even if it’s a really obvious and winnable case?

Good example of when obvious patents harm innovation.

How do you compare non identical twins to the general population? Aren’t twins, even non identical likely to share the same diet, the same environmental factors and maybe even the same viruses etc - all could be contributing factors?

They switched for coal.

Something about the way that was written brought this amusing thought to mind: what if this hype-man blog post about shortly had been created with shortly.

Could the same argument not be levelled at the original incorporation?

I think these answers are going to suffer a lot from survivorship bias.

Am I misreading this? They work for a Fintech and their computer locks when they are away from their computer? Sounds like a misunderstood (or badly implemented?) security measure.

Plenty of vehicles can be driven on the road without paying road tax is the thing. So why would you call it road tax?

Think the perferated panel is the top, and the rear intake is completely exposed.

I think the salient point is this:

> All obvious places already have them

That is, we’re already practically at max capacity for hydro.

“Why pay london rent when you can’t enjoy what the city has to offer?” said my friend that lives there just the other day.

Firstly, is a physical shortage of beds the problem? Capacity is not just physical, where do the doctors come from?

As for building additional capacity with a WW mindset... how about just annex the currently empty offices and buildings?

...now to train some doctors!

if we had robots as articulated as people to puppeteer the other robots then they’d be as lifelike as people can make puppets

lost me at “feat”

I'd settle for spelling and malapropism checks.

I think it looks fine, it’s a recognisable screen and the text is easy to read...

“miles ahead”, no?

TLDR version: “it’s making it too hard to privatise services”