LeanderK

Can you fire tenured faculty? I thought that was not possible (and what tenure was about)?

What's the purpose of live if you won't allow yourself to enjoy it a bit? So yeah, I'll do it, have fun and socialise with my friends. Of course within bounds, we're adults after all.

I bet/hope there are less harmful alternatives out there but unfortunately there's not a lot research afaik on different chemicals.

I can't relate to this at all. I would trade driving for a train trip if the total duration is somewhat comparable (or even a little bit longer), especially if I would have to make the trip regularly.

I don't think flying is convenient but taking a HSR-train is.

but is the oversight effective? Formal supervision alone is irrelevant.

definitely illegal in Europe, never heard of it. Wouldn't that massively hurt the environment???

I though the green in the bayer-filter was over-represented because the human eye is more sensitive to green compared to other colours?

For context, this is a well known slogan for the german state of Baden-Württemberg and I actually had the same association at first!

To the outsider it might seem that the only thing we've been doing is scaling up the neural networks, but that's not true. A lot of innovation and changes happened, some enabled us to scale up more and others just improved performance. I am quite confident that innovation will continue.

Wow, unbelievable that it was designed in 2001! It still looks fresh and modern, although maybe a bit too playful so that it appears a bit childish? But only barely.

It appears to have all the basic functionality expected from a modern operating system, I instantly feel right at home although I've never used it.

I find the review terrible though, one of the major changes was the user interface, revolutionary I would say. It's way more important than wether the GUI configuration options are well thought out or not.

The whole situation seems quite chaotic for me, as I've read here in the comments. Different tolls on different tunnels/roads, different transit providers etc. It seems suboptimal.

I wonder why this is not better designed? At least the public transit situation can be improved, I think. While public transit in germany is quite complicated, I think it stems from a similar federalistic design and maybe the solutions can be translated?

We usually have local public transit owned on the local level, with regional rail owned by the state or the federal railroad company. So different actors like MTA or NJ transit, as I've understood (are there more?).

But we usually have another layer, a transport association. For example in munich it's the mvv, which is owned by the state of bavaria, the city of munich and the neighbouring districts, or the VBB in Berlin, owned by the state of Berlin, the neighbouring state of brandenburg and the districts of berlin and neighbouring of berlin in brandenburg. The transport association usually doesn't own tracks or rail cars, but it's responsible for uniform pricing, ticketing, coordinating schedules and distributing the money to the actual transit providers, which can be federal, local or the state (or multiple states as with berlin).

It is quite complicated and usually in germany nobody knows the difference between the transit providers and the transit association etc., but maybe this system can be translated? It usually leads to a situation where the transport association is perceived as a uniform system and hides the federalists structure behind a common front, and also as a common actor and formal way to coordinate on the future of the system between the different actors.

I think the size of the vehicle is more important because the main issue is the congestion

but on the other side people living in NY have to endure it. You can not just make the people living downtown dependent on the woes of the commuters. I can not imagine driving into NY as a large share of commuting mobility to make sense...it's just too big and dense

not only this, it just decreases quality of life in the downtown. You want less space for cars, less traffic, less noise, less pollution, less parking and more bike lanes, public spaces, space for outside dining on former parking places etc.

Isn't it easier for tourists to just take public transit instead of renting a car? You probably won't find parking next to the empire state building...

I think it's the other way around. The death of the city is when you see it as dependent on the suburbs, it places transportation and ease of access over quality of life. To see big cities thrive means increasing quality of live so that working remotely and other changes will not mean abandonment, but just an easier life inside the city because it results less traffic and more spaces for people, restaurants, cultural institutions and parks.

A conglomeration of office-towers surrounded by suburbs with major arteries leading traffic in and out is not a real city.

why not increase density? it looks like single family home zoning. A denser core would surely be possible

> all functions marked inline (regardless which crate).

Is this a problem is rust? Is too much/too little marked inline? What if you really need to inline some function from some library that was not marked inline by the author?

Can someone comment on "Library-defined containers, iteration and smart pointers"? I have no rust experience so far. Magic compiler support for such primitives is something I usually very much, really strongly dislike, it was always my experience that it is the wrong point of abstraction because it just reduces the design state so much. But then you need good support for inlining the relevant parts of the language, which I think is very often very poorly done. In fact, I have so far never seen a solution I like.

What is the rust experience wrt to inlining? Can every expression be inlined or only selected ones? How can you know what got inlined in some expression? Do you have to manually annotate every single function call you have to inline or is there a more general command?

how could eminent domain have been used to make place for the world trade center? Wasn't it just offices?

I think you have to differentiate. At least in germany, most rail is not fenced off and when we do, we do not use fences but instead sound barriers. I think faster rail is usually behind sound barriers in populated ares, and slower commuter rail is often not fenced off. We do not have many at-grade crossings in more populated areas though, they are really only present on the country-side so I think the rail-infrastructure is not that "present". Nobody really walks or drives over rails usually and it's usually naturally separated, so you can't enter tracks by accident and therefore accidents are quite rare.

this is so blatantly wrong that i loose every respect for these people. It really makes me angry. It's just so selfish. I really don't understand how you can make things worse for everyone, just because you don't want things to change, "city-people" invade you precious suburb or something. In the end gas-guzzling cars pester the environment and use up the precious few emissions we have left in order not to get wrecked by climate change.

as someone living in germany this is absolutely not my impression about courts deciding differently and e.g. siding with "evil corporate side". I also doubt it's corruption, maybe just a smart pick of the district to maximise the chance of judges seemed sympathetic (and completely unknowledgeable of technology).

> Which is weird because people in Eastern Germany are more humane than those in western Germany. But apparently also more needy of money.

Also a weird statement to make

> Making precedent binding seems a bit crazy, to be honest, because if the precedent contains mistakes (which it inevitably does), then those mistakes become binding also, right? So logical inconsistency and contradiction is inevitably part of the common law system?

It is also not the correct institution to "make law" I think. It does not represent the population in some way as in a representative democracy should be. It was not debated in the parliament and it was not campaigned on. It is in some way a rule of experts.

just tie it to the apple-id like the phone itself

this is still no excuse. You could just disable 3rd party replacement parts by group-wise policy, maybe even enabled as default.

I think it's possible and it would be a good thing. Although I wonder...I use a slightly older brother printer (prob. 4-5 years old) with 3rd-party cartridges without problems. Is it different with other printers?

German, but have not studies law: Interesting, because as a german the common law approach is equally weird. I see judges as only interpreter of law but they wield so much power in the common law system. In my perspective the only source where the decisions should be derived from is the law and not some precedent. Lawmakers are the representative democracy in action but judges are not, way more arbitrary. So the law is the only source of truth which we learn to read (amateurish) in school, so I feel a bit comfortable in reading it and have some idea what's going on when I talk with law-school friends.

In contrast, the respect for precedents results in a system that's not "derived from first principles". It has a certain elegance because you have a book where the law is written and you can just follow. It feels way more arbitrary and wrong to refer to some case years ago, undemocratic I would say and also inaccessible besides for the professionals who know how to find these. Not that you as an amateur should defend yourself but for small disputes you can still look at the law and ask someone more familiar to give you the right paragraphs before turning to a professional lawyer and a legal dispute.

Of course it has its own disadvantages and the laws get hugely complicated in effort to regulate everything.

Maybe because I've grown up here, but to me Common law feels "medieval" and I do not want to switch to a system where judges posses so much power. Ideally, in my POV, decisions should be almost algorithmic from a source of truth, comparable to computer code, specifying rules on how to arrive at results.

> The net effect was of a system that felt somewhat arbitrary, with broad-ranging but unexplained decisions made by relatively inexperienced people, often well outside any area with which they could reasonably be expected to be familiar. In general, there was much less legal certainty than I would be comfortable with.

Some perspective on this, since I know a judge. In germany, it is common to rotate the judges every few years to new positions (e.g. from traffic to financial cases). They get a refresher in the specific laws relevant for the area, but they also have a "group" they divide the cases with. The group also acts as professional support to each other so if there's uncertainty then there's always the colleagues.

that's actually a great idea. While it's certainly not for everyone, if you don't like it there's every other apartment to choose. It's great to have options from the monotony of the usual apartments.

> You definitely don't need (or want) a car in Boston

I have never been to Boston, but if this is true then why is the public transport map so weird? There's the subway for inter-city travel but if you're commuting then commuter rail does not seem practical at all because of this weird gap? To me it made the impression of a neglected system, presumably because everyone commutes by car. Is there still space downtown for e.g. bicycle lanes? Otherwise this surely would have been fixed for decades now.

Or is it just painful to commute because there's a livable downtown with public transit, bike lanes etc., which was not completely sacrificed for cars, but just without a great commuter solution?

There are also LGBTQ rights. What if your child ends up coming out to you? Just because you're not part of it is not a valid reason. It's like saying you don't care about racism because you don't personally experience it even though you don't belong to a minority yourself.