goatcode

That's a fair point, but a similar point could be made about the efficiency and energy density of solar vs. coal. Definitely about wind vs. coal. So I'd say based on that the entire original point is mastabatory at best.

Our comments and questions along these lines don't seem to be too popular. Sometimes I wonder how I ended up in the industry I'm in with my own locally unique thoughts and conclusions. It's very tiring.

> Bitcoin is an ecological nightmare

Compared with other forms of currency, how does it stack up?

I wonder how much energy is used by just the cafeterias combined in all of the federal reserve's many offices.

>for example limiting "crime prediction"

I saw that too, and ended up wondering if it'll be ignored if it's seen that crime prediction falls under the "public safety" exception, from time to time (or eventually, altogether). That's the problem with vague things like "public safety" being tied to regulation, imo.

Any governing body seems to leave a lot of room for "except for pigs" when they write down their rules. The bigger the body, the more potential pigs there are.

>The use of AI in the military is exempt, as are systems used by authorities in order to safeguard public security.

Of course.

I feel you on this. It's weird having to balance things between passion and necessity. Sometimes, I feel completely disconnected from what I work on as a career; I then contemplate what I'd like to do, and I'm either up against much lower pay or not caring about anything enough to want to do it. In my case, I probably need a solid, real vacation. Usually when I get some rest I can find some passion.

It's a struggle, and I think very few make it to the place where they can say the old "I love what I do, so I never work a day in my life!"

For me, I take joy from the fact that I'm providing for my family, and this really helps get me through the slumps. I also do different things in my spare time, some of which are completely orthogonal to my career (other than the problem solving aspect), and this gives me joy.

All the best in contemplating things! You'll make it.

YNAB uses Plaid and MX: https://www.youneedabudget.com/security/

People are just so used to doing stuff like this. The upside is that the companies who do these transactions have a lot of exposure, and thus incentive to not mess up. People are probably just numb to a lot of these sorts of things, either that or they're just unaware that they're using a third party. It's possible that younger generations aren't even aware of how to use other means, like cashiers checks or money orders.

While it's now voluntary as the article quotes, one might be concerned that it might become the de-facto norm. An aspect of this that's troubling is that it would create a further divide for people who are under-privileged, in the same way access to the Internet and computers does today, as some argue, in the job market.

>it seems like such a horrible idea

It probably is.

> To this day I don't understand why anyone would use Plaid.

It's more desirable to use a fin-tech company to handle all that than take on the liability yourself, as a company wanting to receive payments (or connect to transaction info, like a lot of the popular budgeting apps do).

JavaWorld and The Register are decent go-tos for me.

That's how you deal with trolls from countries with very strict language laws.

This is a huge question. I wonder how many have experienced a very deep pathway into their lives before they realize they don't organically care about it.

The FCC is an unelected, mostly unaccountable entity. I think George Carlin had some things to say about them. That they have any control over transmission of anything outside of a technical, practical scope is a travesty, imo.

Beyond the hardened strawmen of actual written law, we have a shifting sense of what is publicly acceptable. Given that most people do what everyone else around them is doing, or at least what they believe others are doing, there exists a powerful tool in that to control the public discourse. We've gone from "I disagree with what you say, but I will die to protect your ability to say it," to "I think someone will find this offensive, so I will also find this offensive, despite my not knowing anyone who'd actually be offended by it."

The laws are a harder target, so those who would wish to stifle inconvenient discourse likely would find it easier to convince a mostly pliable, trusting public to not say the things they don't want said. That there still are a small number of companies controlling what a majority of people consume might be convenient to this.

All conjecture, of course. More of the Paul Harvey "If I Were The Devil" kind of thing.

Nope, it's definitely Mr., which possibly explains why "Master" practically disappeared. And while it may have been used to address boys, it could be comparable to Mme and Mlle in French. An older but still unmarried woman would be addressed as madame, but the marriage distinction still exists otherwise. "Master Bruce (Wayne)" was definitely not a boy, as an example in (something like) literature.

We used to have a sense of humor, too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cox%E2%80%93Zucker_machine

>Mr. not depending on marital status

Not anymore, that is. It used to be an abbreviation for two appellations, one of which was associated with an unmarried gentleman. It's rarely used outside of the British Commonwealth, anymore. Except on Fresh Prince, of course.

I understand the grumpy old person archetype now. I feel like I've been one for a long time, but it's really hitting home over the past decade.

Some time up until people started getting the internet on their phones, roughly. Of course, no definition is perfect.

This explains why I feel so exhausted when I incorporate a lot of work-like training and exploratory stuff into my day. I'm working at least 3 times more than most!

Weird. This must have changed in the past 10 years or so, since I've been out of college.

>the strong force and the weak force.

Is there a reason we're leaving "nuclear" off these forces' names now?

I could hope that the hackability could at least extend to changing behaviors not related to safety, but I'd imagine there would be some justification for just about anything being about safety.

> And the fact is that humans can't reliably identify emotions from photographs, so there's zero chance for AI.

I believe there are a lot of examples of AI doing things that humans can't. Typically it's a matter of scale, but sometimes it's a matter of some correlations being beyond the basic capabilities of humans. I could be wrong, but I'm not sure that this is the best metric for whether AI could do something.

Hopefully there will be at least one company that will offer a hackable car. I'd hate to be locked into doing only the things the designers want me to do with a thing I own.

The vast variety and diversity of cultures and peoples historically in Northern Europe discovered after 10 minutes of looking makes both "white supremacists" and white-frighters look equally extremely silly. I understand the idea of wanting to provide an open space to discuss issues of various different people, but it sometimes pays to push your comfort level and be open to new experiences.

> supposedly full of disgusting poor people and criminals, and run by slumlords who skimp on maintenance.

Interestingly, back when housing was more affordable, they were, for that reason (using the lingo, of course not judging people). The people who were disadvantaged enough to not be able to enter into the "normal" housing market would have had rough enough lives that it would have manifested in the ways that might have caused others to label them as "disgusting, poor people," and because they would have had few other options, those that operated the parks could easily take advantage of them.

Now, however, the image is perhaps what perpetuates the culture of trailer parks in some areas. People who have a choice go elsewhere, instead of bringing their advantages and positive influences into certain places, do so even it's not overall optimal to their lives, because of an old heuristic. It might be a good financial decision (which I myself have taken advantage of) for people who are less able to afford typical housing, but they may avoid it because of the stigma, and the cycle continues.

This is a neat article, and I believe an important one. When we get together with people whose lives and circumstances differ, we all can potentially benefit.

Interesting: I went into reading this thinking in the context of programs. However, reading the replies here has made me realize it wasn't constrained to just that. For programs, there are better alternatives, especially if you're using a deployment pipeline that has things like key-value stores. In general, environment variables are great, especially for things that have access, practically, to not much else, like shells.