jackcviers3

We already know that the object over the great lakes was a balloon with metal structural support, different in size and payload than the one we shot down over the Atlantic coast, but a similar object. There was a memo released about it reported on CNN.

What concerns me is that the countermeasures (missiles) we are using to destroy these things likely cost an order of magnitude more than the balloons cost to create. Certainly less than spy satellites that can do the same job. If we are going to defend our airspace from these surveillance platforms, we have to find more cost-effective means of taking them down than $1M missiles.

All of the visual and hierarchical information abstracted away for visual users in a website that conveys information.

Abstracted visual semantic clues:

  * the type of data in said div

  * the indentation

  * the typography

  * the animations

the layout on the page

  * the interactivity
 with touch and mouse and keyboard events

These clues arw completely lost to blind users. Semantic attributes can help build up that hierarchical information for non-visual users. And yes, the name of a division is semantic information. It serves the purpose of defining an identifier for a section of a document, much like the title of the list above.

Am I the only one that found the more explicitly named definition way easier to read? Sure the definition name was too large, but the inner variables were great.

It's also what the fed wants to slow inflation.

I thought both books were entirely too generous in their depictions of humanity's ability to coordinate for enormous, earth-saving efforts. I have a feeling that a real extinction level crisis would be much more like Don't Look Up or Greenland(extra optimistic ending scenes not included) than we'd care to admit. Bureaucratic incompetency and political infighting leading to a tragic and preventable end in both cases presented in the books.

I can't think of a single famous software engineer that continuously redefined the entire industry, every single year. Like, some language designers and tooling creators have redefined the industry once a decade. But every year? For what definition of redefine does that apply?

If you are measuring productivity, the authors of significantly popular programming languages are 10x via their programs enabling the users of the programming languages to develop software and the economic value that software provides.

The same can be said of tooling and major OS programmers.

The work of devs like Guido van Rossum created, Linus Torvalds, Ken Thompson David Moon ,Richard Stallman and many others is so multiplicative in terms of economic value output that a single order of magnitude doesn't come close to describing it. It's probably more like two or three orders of magnitude.

This is why configurations as code should be written in actual programming languages. Dhall, Nix, and Pulumi are all solutions geared towards configuration but written with fully capable, user-extensible, programming languages.

I cynically suspect this to be the case. As soon as one does it; the others have to follow to have any hope of controlling the tech salary bubble. They Don have to collude, just watch and match percentages.

I imagine someone manually changing the flight manifest by clicking a delete button on each passenger and crew member, and waiting on a database save and gui redraw after each action. Complete with major timeouts and concurrency errors due to the massive spike in traffic caused by the storm.

It would be awful.

This all sounds incredibly dysfunctional. With remote work the new normal, I wonder if a new great migration will occur soon.

Huh. It's almost like writing native guis with cross-platform bindings was a thing for a reason.

> Selective Science Unbalanced reporting. Cherry-picking the literature. All signs of pseudoscience. The anti-ice movement has neglected years of research on the mechanism of ice after injury, focusing only on a select few studies that support (but in reality DON’T support) their argument. Dr. Knight explained that ice is not an ‘anti-inflammatory’ per-say (Knight, 1976); rather, it prevents the secondary injury to tissues by dampening the negative physiological effects of widespread inflammation. His position has been supported by other researchers as well (Ho et al. 1994, Merrick et al. 1999). And to top it off, one study quoted against icing (Bleakley et al. 2004) even concluded, “The sooner after injury cryotherapy is initiated, the more beneficial this reduction in metabolism will be.” Hmmm…the anti-ice crowd must have missed that statement. [1]

> The Benefits of Ice Ice is not wrong or harmful. The theory that ice impedes the normal healing response by limiting inflammation is not well documented in the literature. If you have been swayed by this on the internet, I would urge you to try to research this more and scrutinize the literature. Be careful of what you see on the internet and ALWAYS seek to validate anything yourself.

Ice has plenty of benefits and clinical validation.

Proper application of cryotherapy can reduce secondary injury and reduce edema formation if applied within the first 36 to 48 hours (remember, ice doesn’t reduce swelling after the acute injury phase, and may not play a huge role in inflammation or recovery). We do know that ice helps reduce pain, spasm, and guarding, allowing more mobility (Barber et al. 1998, Raynor et al. 2005). More than anything, ice is a convenient and potent pain reliever, so it’s ok to apply ice to ‘chronic’ conditions as a safer pain reliever at any time. In fact, cryotherapy has been shown to decrease the amount of prescription pain medications needed after surgery (Barber et al. 1998, Raynor et al. 2005).[1]

1. https://mikereinold.com/is-icing-really-bad-for-you/ (2018)

Ice has shown benefits in study and practice, and the above article has many cited studies and a critique of anti-ice articles.

Scala's compiler used to widen prematurely and apply implicit conversions similarly to what you described.

Scala 3 doesn't do that [1]. The new inference algorithm will, however, prefer a generic method over the same named method without a generic argument in scope when no typing hints are present in the source code when there are two possible matches for an inference completion. This can then cause problems when the generic expects some kind of given parameter:

    def foo: String = ...
    def foo[A:SomeRequiredThing]:A = ...

    //in some other place
    foo shouldBe("hello") // foo[String](using SomeRequiredThing[String])
                          // gets preferentially selected by the scala 3
                          // inference algorithm, which can lead to surprising
                          // though not "incorrect" results [also 1]
                          

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMvOykNQ4zs

What does coffeescript have to do with performance? It compiles down to JS just like every other js front-end lang.

The US already got there in the 30s. Government subsidies are what disincentivized overproduction and got the US out along with better soil preservation techniques.

Modern farms are moving to no-till and cover crop practices to protect the soil. Fertilizer isn't as expensive as you think - ammonia and lime are pretty abundant, coupled with good old manure spreading and crop rotation, you can manage the soil pretty well.

The Midwest corn belt is in Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. This area largely doesn't need irrigation. That mostly occurs west of the Missouri where wheat is slightly more prevalent due to corn's irrigation needs.

Source - I grew up on, and farmed myself on, a Midwest Iowa farm, and worked on the largest real-time data analytics pipeline in the agricultural industry for almost six years, my father still farms, and I ran an agritech startup building an autonomous applicator for 5 years.

Our real problems are distribution and storage, exports, chemical runoff, new crop diseases and climate change with more prevalent droughts and floods likely in the future. But we're in no danger of another dust bowl or sudden yield collapse. Yields today are nearly double what they were when I was a kid in the 80s.

More farmers need to plant cover crops and no-till and use set-aside land for soil preservation, but the good ones are already doing this, and profiting. Agronomists and university extension offices are educating farmers about this.

Agricultural states aren't poor - Indiana, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Missouri and Iowa are 19, 20, 21, 22, and 31 in state GDP rankings. My State's median income is $61,000 / year and the average household income is $85,000 / year.

The cited documentary and this meta-thread seem to have some biases and/conflate Great Plains states with Midwestern states.

I'm just imagining some of these comments when said to some of my old coaches and the wind sprints that would follow.

You all can laugh, but this has been a standard beginner running back drill since football was a thing [1].

I am not a biomechanics expert, or a football coach. But I still remember this explanation from when I played as a kid, and this drill. I'm 41 now, and still use the cut turn when I play pickup soccer occasionally (though not as well as I did as a young man).

Planting with the outside foot allows for more lateral movement at higher speeds, less risk of slippage, and requires less balance than planting with your inside foot. It also allows you to fake the turn via a fake plant (deadleg) and execute a more advanced jump cut (instead of pushing to land, you plant the other foot beside the lead leg, shift your weight to your toes, transfer weight to one foot, and push off that foot for even faster forward deceleration and more lateral acceleration in the chosen direction).

The natural way to make a turn at high speed involves many short choppy steps to slow enough to make the turn. This is inefficient, and alerts a defender the turn is imminent.

Turning this way is a basic fundamental that leads to more advanced concepts. We drilled with a coach, cones marking a space one to two yards in front of and a half yard on either side of a tackling dummy. It's also drilled as a series of alternating cones or bags in a stairstep pattern in a particular direction.

In our old drill, the player sprints directly at the dummy and the coach indicates left or right once the player reaches the cones. The player must plant with the correct foot, miss the dummy, and move at least as far laterally as the cone is from the dummy with enough balance to accelerate upfield after the turn is complete. Usually, it's accompanied by changing hands with the ball away from the dummy to prevent fumbles.

It is not an innate talent that cannot be taught. It is not natural to change direction in a full sprint in this manner. It does require great lower body strength, balance, and reaction time. And drilling this at a young age helps to develop the necessary skills and strength until it seems innate.

1: https://youtu.be/g9V6Rf6xPNg

Yeah, tabnine kills it at the data entry parts of test dev as well for sure.

Tabnine, in emacs, with lsp mode gives you single line completions and predicts and fills out word by word in a very effective manner. It's an actual timesaver and worth the money (in emacs). The vscode experience is more problematic, but that's vscode's completions guis fault, not the tabnine server's.

I almost never use the mouse in vscode, emacs keybindings and the command pallete and keyboard shortcuts created any time I touch the mouse. But I also don't get everything I want, (like macros and web browsing and face customization and rectangular editing) that I get with emacs, so I only use vscode for liveshare.

Incidentally, I use and pay for tabnine (another ai assistant) in emacs and it's fantastic - single line completions are superior to whole snippets I have to read with copilot, and don't get me out of my flow.

I am surprised the tabnine company completions are way easier to work with than in vscode. With grouped backends, company lsp + company tabnine is great. I'd encourage kite users to try it. Well worth the money.

I remember when it was $1 for almost 7 years, then went to $1.49. It hurt because now you had to feed 2 bills into machines that could barely take 1 reliably, and were always out of change.

How that didn't drive the price back down to $1 or up to $2 I'll never understand. It had to have increased labor on the parts of the vendors and decreased demand for the vendors at the same time. That's about the time I started just stocking a 6 pack or 2 liter (depending on which was cheaper per oz) in the fridge for the week, too, which drops the unit price.it also decreased the total volume of soft drinks that I bought.

I don't know how soft drinks can continue to increase in prices under that dynamic. My guess is that the majority of people just buy it and don't notice anything that costs less than $10 anymore, so convenience stores can get away with movie theater prices as long as they don't cross that trivial threshold. People will pay for convenience under $10.

You can't buy a book, keep it on a shelf, lend it to new hires, and afford to have an employee take a week out of being productive to learn something? Or you can't afford salaries for a company of people who have more than 5 years of development experience?

Both sound like major dysfunctional problems.

My System76 laptop with Nvidia graphics is faster than the M1 Pro I have for work, has more cores, and 64G of ram means I can run all my communications stuff and an ide and a compiler and a local k3s and the machine won't break a sweat. However, the battery will drain in an hour and a half doing all that. Performance is definitely not an issue on non-arm machines. Battery life is.

More analogous to software development is the design of the house with the blueprints as output, and regulations, client review, and architect creative inspiration as the software specs. Nobody complains about blueprints being delivered too slowly. They just happen on a competitive landscape where two people are racing to deliver to the client so the slowest person loses.

I like kanban, a stack of tasks with predefined dependencies determining if a card can be picked up, and sorted in priority order once they can be picked up. When something critical goes wrong, the entire team stops and works the problem individually, competitively , until the problem is solved, and the team then resumes their prior work. CI/CD delivers to production, features are enabled when they are ready and the customer is ready. Feedback goes immediately back into the stack and delivery leads constantly manage the feature flags, the stack priority, and inter team communication. The devs just dev and stop the line. The team tech lead, product lead, delivery lead, architect, and program/product lead do all the negotiations and priority setting. There are no estimates. You deliver constantly. You need strong leads and architects to run this way, and you should probably coach your client to expect slow change at first, and rapid change after the first release.

Done this at several clients, for several different domains, with lots of interdependent teams as a consultant, and it is highly productive. The one time it failed, we didn't get buy-in on feature flags in production and the client insisted on batched release branches and long-term maintenance branches for those cut releases.

The other, minor failure, is that it is very prone to momentum. That's when teams get overconfident that they can fix problems in-band with tasks (because they've been successful for so long), and are resistant to stopping the line. This can be spotted by a person not delivering a pr for more than two weeks, or not transitioning a card to done for more than two weeks. Tech lead calls a meeting, determines the issue, decides on stop the line or not.

It works. It's iterative. It keeps the number of communications channels and decision stakeholders low. It cross-polinates through linked dependencies. It ensures product cohesion thru feature flags. It evades critical missteps and bugs via stop the line. And it works well with our modern SSO dev/platform ops and integrated toolsets (Atlassian/clickup + ci pipeline of choice where docs, features, delivery can all talk to each other and reports can be generated for leads that pull from the integrated tools). It doesn't fix Conway's law, but I am not sure that actually needs fixing in truly large development houses.

They are speaking of the feud between ZIOs creator John de Goes and long-time Typelevel steering committee member Travis Brown (https://meta.plasm.us/posts/2019/09/01/jdg-and-the-fp-commun...) and split the community along those same party lines.

Do you not have some sort of work chat? Video calls? Peer review of your work output? I haven't worked with anything with oversight as lax as you are describing in at least a decade.

How do you understand the original intent?

> Civil forfeiture allows police to seize — and then keep or sell — any property they allege is involved in a crime. Owners need not ever be arrested or convicted of a crime for their cash, cars, or even real estate to be taken away permanently by the government.

--[1]

They don't need to prove or even charge you to take property from you. It's robbery.

The law needs to require a warrant issued by a judge to sieze the property. The property siezed needs to be stored as evidence, kept separate from other budget items in law enforcement organizations so that it cannot be used to cover expenditures (through auction or otherwise), be under the same sort of provisions as indefinitely holding individuals without charges, be returned in total when charges are not brought to trial or when a trial results in an acquittal, and the material should be subject to destruction after a guilty verdict and appeals are exhausted. Basically, the siezing organization shouldn't be able to use the material proceeds as part of the organizations' operating budgets at any time unless the material is voluntarily submitted by the convicted parties in lieu of levied fines after a conviction. It is evidence, not a funding source.

I'm not saying that the government should not be able to take illegitimately gained property from convicted criminals; but that the incentive to do so for material gains by the government without conviction is rife with the potential for abuse as things currently stand.

[1] https://www.aclu.org/issues/criminal-law-reform/reforming-po....

I think it depends on the language server - metals for Scala, jdtls for Java, pyright for python,jstls for Javascript/Typescript and omnisharp-roslyn for c# are all pretty good. Cold startup time for lsp servers in bigger languages (scala/java/c#) are akin to IntelliJ/Rider import times.

I don't have all the same refactorings as intellij, but then I don't have to pay a license to edit c# code, either. Most people that I watch use IntelliJ don't use it to its fullest extent. I will open it to pair with other IntelliJ users. But I'm faster in emacs. I've also used it professionally for almost twenty years. To get me to switch an ide would have to be as extensible, keyboard centric, cheap (both free and in terms of memory usage), and portable (across platforms and languages) as emacs has been.

That's a tall order.

Why? Who would this system benefit? You destroy the housing market to replace it with rich landlords owning apartment buildings and charging increasing amounts of rent to more poorer people who accumulate no equity. In your get sick scenario, you are still homeless but owe massive medical bills.

After paying off the medical bills with appreciating uome ownership, your credit is still good, and you can eventually buy another house. All your land-value tax does is punish wealth accumulation. What is the reform you wish to create? How does this help anyone?