justifier

> Tesla CEO Elon Musk and CTO JB Straubel are in Germany today to announce the acquisition of a German engineering group, Grohmann Engineering. Following the announcement, they held a press conference during which Musk emphasised that Tesla is planning “significant investments” in Germany and the conversation quickly moved to Tesla not only investing in engineering in Europe, but also in production.

Musk confirmed that Tesla plans to choose a location for ‘Gigafactory 2’ in Europe next year and he added that the factory will combine both the production of batteries and complete cars.

https://electrek.co/2016/11/08/tesla-location-gigafactory-2-...

i agree, I linked more for the similarity in experience between the gp and the author in regard their unlearning

I prefer your clarifications when considering the function of capacitors

That said, water does attract water.. the term used to describe the phenomena is cohesion

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohesion_(chemistry)

Your desired explanation also would prime kids for introduction to other similar number sets, like the complex plane.. easing understanding significantly in comparison to referring to them as 'imaginary numbers'

From the linked notes:

I never really understood capacitors until I started trying to construct proper water-analogies for them. Then I discovered that my electronics and physics classes had sent me down a dead-end path with their garbage about "capacitors store electric charge." Since my discovery, I've gained significantly more expertise in circuit design, which leads me to a sad thought. Maybe the more skilled of electrical engineers and scientists gain their extreme expertise not through classroom learning. Instead they gain expertise in spite of our K-12 classroom learning. Maybe the experts are experts only because they have fought free of the wrong parts of grade school science, while the rest of us are still living under the yoke of the many physics misconceptions we were carefully taught in early grades.

http://amasci.com/emotor/cap1.html

Richard Karp: (Berkeley, unsure, P!=NP) My intuitive belief is that P is unequal to NP, but the only supporting arguments I can offer are the failure of all efforts to place specific NP-complete problems in P by constructing polynomial-time algorithms.

I believe that the traditional proof techniques will not suffice. Something entirely novel will be required.

My hunch is that the problem will be solved by a young researcher who is not encumbered by too much conventional wisdom about how to attack the problem.

this is an excellent talk

a link to the video: https://skillsmatter.com/skillscasts/9146-building-a-bank-wi...

thanks for giving and posting it

i especially appreciate the effort because a month ago i posted this(o) comment:

> can anyone suggest reading to understand how contemporary banks function, where can i get an understanding of a bank or credit union from a software engineer's perspective: dependencies, steps to start, challenges of running, protections from common problems, interesting emerging disruptions;

best of luck with monzo, https://monzo.com/

(o) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12567536

fair, but the parent was bringing attention to the notion of editorialising received leaks

pay and squirm sounds vindicative and that sentiment is self referencing because the ones paying and squirming are doing so because how they would editorialise is fundamentally different then those doing the editorialising

from the site as of this writing under the submit page(o):

> WikiLeaks publishes documents of political or historical importance that are censored or otherwise suppressed. We specialise in strategic global publishing and large archives.

importance is the language of an editor.. censor?

(o) https://wikileaks.com/#submit

this is a great anectdote, but the reason i am replying to your comment is because of your user name

i am a huge fan of the turn of the century dancer isadora duncan and her lover who she first had a child with, the theatre set design theorist, edward gordon craig who she affectionately called endymion

a complete aside, but if you have, or anyone reading this has, yet to read duncan's autobiography 'my life' i highly recommend it to anyone and everyone

she is a brilliant writer, lived an eccentric life, and she was and her writing is imbued with a mad passion for expression and both life's hardships and joys

Then the confusion arises from you applying your own unique definition stead the one agreed upon by the publically accessible literature chronicling the definitions of words

Again, just a distraction

To be an issue of entitlement the person would have to say something that sets them apart, akin to: it's ok for me to pirate but for everyone else its bad;

Whereas the gp was just describing their process without applying any opinion on the ethics of others doing the same

an excuse is just an excuse, the special treatment is what makes it entitled

Have you ever pirated anything? If you have then your position would make you the entitled one because you are claiming it is wrong for this person to pirate though you have done so yourself

Why offer your opinion with lazy pithy statements and attempts to compartmentalise complex ideas into a single word?

It reads so demonstrative and finite as if these issues lack any capacity for dialogue

I think your perspective is important to this conversation but I'm unable to access it due to how you are presenting it

Right, but is that how you define shoplifting?

Shoplifting is when someone buys something, then has it withheld from them, then get a refund, then access that product from someone else offering to share it with them?

I guess I was trying to move the conversation away from what I see as a flawed analogy to what I think is technically interesting, and that I have first hand experience with, in that the companies offering paid services fail to support them to the same standard as their free services

For the record the phone time seeking the refund, for me, lacked an appropriate roi so i am out the money and was stunted from exposing myself to the media.. media which the creator and distributor trusted goog with making available to me

There are so many interesting subtleties it's frustrating to bury the conversation in a flawed analogy

Your reference to shoplifting is so knee jerk and tired it fails to even apply to this instance

If you read it again you'll see the person paid for the product and then the product they paid for was kept from them

Same thing happened to me, I tried to rent a film on touyube but the stream consistently erred after 2s of low quality viewing.. what really bugged me was I could watch any trending video on the free service without issue on any quality setting but the movie I paid for lacked the same supply attention and was buggy for the entire rental window

Who's going to go after googs for the 6$ I spent trying to watch a movie but an error on touyube stopped me from having the access I paid for?

How is it high ground to withhold sympathy when it is a mega corps stealing from a user?

when I was in school I used to use my email service's 'save as draft' function as a log in anywhere document store

You're right that persistent data stores are a boon for education and I hope you're right that the administration is actively integrating it

I really like the fact that gdocs also has a version control feature built in

It's my opinion that version control is an important concept for people to understand and grow comfortable with using

But is this a proof?

It's seems like essentially the same as 'proving' Riemann by using a computer to calculate the first 100,000 values of 0.. which is considered unsuitable as proof

If using examples as evidence of proof I was under the impression you needed to also prove the completeness and consistency of the pattern from the examples

This reads to me like if instead disproving a finite hypothesis Euclids proof of the infinitude of primes just consisted of listing the first 7 prime numbers allowing the reader to make the assumption, 'well those are getting bigger they must all get bigger'

From the readme:

> A not too crappy GPU. mpv is not intended to be used with bad GPUs. There are many caveats with drivers or system compositors causing tearing, stutter, etc. On Windows, you might want to make sure the graphics drivers are current, especially OpenGL. In some cases, ancient fallback video output methods can help (such as --vo=xv on Linux), but this use is not recommended or supported. (o)

Whereas VLC has a similar option but it's sort of an afterthought and you have to activate it, from the wiki:

> The VLC media player framework can use your graphic card (a.k.a. GPU) to accelerate decoding of video streams depending on the video codec, graphic card model and operating system.

(o) https://github.com/mpv-player/mpv/blob/master/README.md

(i) https://wiki.videolan.org/VLC_GPU_Decoding/

3d of a 2d fractal is one of the things the group that made the video from the original post are trying to achieve:

http://www.hpdz.net/TechInfo/CameraTilt.htm

you can imagine the compelxity of introducing perspective into the already computationally heavy fractal calculations

i always lament these fractal visualations lack a real time coordinate system

even just bounds at the edges of the visualised space would help to illustrate the phenomenon.. also, the utilised color key would further illuminate

i'm sorry, but it seems clear to me that wells is ridiculing joyce's 'last two works'

> Now with regard to this literary experiment of yours.. I don’t think it gets anywhere.

> .. Your last two works have been more amusing and exciting to write than they will ever be to read.

even ignoring how joyce suffered while writing these works, i can say anecdotally that wells is so completely wrong in this assertion because i found reading these works to be both extremely amusing and exciting to read

> .. Do I get much pleasure from this work? No.

> .. Do I feel I am getting something new and illuminating ..? No.

that is some clearly contemptuous ire.. and you said you agreed:

> I think Well's both captures what Joyce is up to, and clearly expresses why it's not for him. I feel much the same toward Joyce.

so i apologise for reading your post as agreeing with wells' contempt but it seemed to me a pretty sure reading that that was your intent

that said, now that you have described what you meant by 'wondering about ones impact' it seems like an innocuous game and i suppose my reaction to it was more about its proximity to wells' opinions that i still read as clearly saying joyce's choices were simply wrong

asking 'what would have been if he wrote in esperanto instead?' takes on different connotation when presented as nonsequitor, but when paired with 'he wasted his potential. what would have been if he wrote in esperanto instead?' it just reads rude

i am also confused why my opinion that wells is belligerently overreaching is controversial when the paris review even notes it in their lede describing the letter as "reacting, irascibly if not uncharitably"

i like wake and ulysses

> I've fought my way through the most of the Wake

this assumes a prerequisite that books, or novels, should be read cover to cover.. personally i am without this prerequisite i can pick up wake and read a single sentence and put it down and be wholly satiated

> Joyce's talent for language is obvious; his choice of where to dedicate that talent is not.

i love to have my expectations subverted, i find the obvious can often turn droll and disappointing

this is clear from the fact that dubliners bores me but i think wake is the only true novel, ulysses is the first iteration of that endeavour and is much more approachable but i think he achieved the closest thing to the platonic ideal of what i, for myself, consider a novel: a true account of affects and effects; with finnegan's wake

i think of wake as a literary fractal

what is often accused of being crowded, elabourate, riddled digressions i see as the truest account possible

like you said of me misreading you, i believe it, because regardless of the amount of words you use there will always be more that was left out that could have further elucidated those ideas

joyce seems to follow a single strand to a point of abstraction that the reader feels unable to comprehend the moment and in so doing achieves the truest expression of that moment

any finite description is incomplete

and someone could respond, 'but joyce's abstractions are well documented and you can read the text annotated to understand every foible' but that only defends that position that the work is incredibly calculated and anything but gibberish

to truly define stephen dedalus and his mind joyce would have to write within abstractions that joyce would be unable to have because joyce is wholly disparate from stephen

to attempt any such an effort would be indistinguishable from gibberish even for the author because in its essence the author would have to be unaware of what he is writing and why

so, as i see it, his only possible choice is to take it to the point that he is aware of what is being said but the reader is just too far from familiar

from this letter wells seems to revel in telling some other person why he does what he does, which from my reading is hillariously the exact opposite of what joyce wanted his readers to get from his work: life is enigmatic to life

i could be wrong about joyce, but that is why i love it

similarly, when in development i'll hack around slow CI times by storing the output of the most cycle heavy steps in the CI and on subsequent runs determine if i can just use the old stored values stead running through everything

that said, i agree that there should be effort, or at least roadmap, to get CI compile times down to near native

to play devels[sic] advocate we've had lengthy compile times on systems and native apps since time immemorial, it just seems that browser work has caught up in complexity and ubiquity.. even if some of that complexity can be blamed on negligent or lazy development

thanks for answering my question about his use of the word propaganda

i'm glad i asked the question instead of just ascribing my assumptions about its use as fact and then criticising it

> your post is almost as unreadable as Joyce's prose

but this sally is as vapid and condescending as wells was in his letter

i felt the response was succinct and well rounded so i left off the second paragraph, but since you quoted it in full here i'll share my thoughts on that as well

i hate this notion of 'the common man', it is self indulgent condescending jargon and it reeks of the 'what about the children' argument

if i could get wells to define this vague label more clearly, then follow his criteria to find a group of people, give those people a copy of ulyses or wake, and if even only one gains some value from it.. what then? does the definition of 'common man' for wells herein actually only imply 'someone who hates this book as much as i do'

honestly this paragraph is so filled with logical fallacies and lazy criticisms i'll just paste it here again in full with a few edits:

"Now with regard to this [thought] experiment of yours. It’s a considerable thing because you are a very considerable man and you have in your crowded composition a mighty genius for expression [and calculation] which has escaped discipline. But I don’t think it gets anywhere. You have turned your back on common men—on their elementary needs and their restricted time and intelligence, and you have elaborated. What is the result? Vast riddles. Your last two works[the special and general theories of relativity] have been more amusing and exciting to write than they will ever be to read. Take me as a typical common reader. Do I get much pleasure from this work? No. Do I feel I am getting something new and illuminating as I do when I read Anrep’s dreadful translation of Pavlov’s badly written book on Conditioned Reflexes? No. So I ask: Who the hell is this [einstein] who demands so many waking hours of the few thousand I have still to live for a proper appreciation of his quirks and fancies and flashes of rendering?"

you're right, best to just ignore it.. o and you better write him a letter telling him you intend to do so

i am unsure exactly what wells means by any of his words, but he's dead so i am unable to ask him

if i were to follow well's example laid out in the letter i could just assert my own assumptions as fact and criticise those, but instead i will just try to explain how his words affect me

also, it is important to note that it is difficult to truly know anything about this letter because we are unaware of any prior or subsequent correspondence

> The outcome is that I don’t think I can do anything for the propaganda of your work.

did wells mean for the word propaganda to be a subtle dig? does he mean 'promotion'?

'i don't think i can do anything for'.. who asked him to? did joyce? is wells just asserting that his approval should be important to joyce?

if this letter was unsolicited i'd argue it's more about wells than joyce, and as it stands alone i find it abhorrent

> Your training has been Catholic, Irish, insurrectionary; mine, such as it was, was scientific, constructive and, I suppose, English.

on first glance this sentence had me suddenly wanting to read wells, until i read it again and realised he's 'just making pretty sounds' without any evidence or explicit reasoning which i would think any scientific and constructive mind would consider wholly necessary

this hearkens back to my first notion about a correspondence but why does wells tell joyce what joyce's 'training' is? and then set his own assumed 'training' up as a counterpoint.. and a very appealing one at that

wells continues on in this effort to assign opinion and motivation to joyce and then set himself as the better

> And while you were brought up under the delusion of political suppression I was brought up under the delusion of political responsibility. It seems a fine thing for you to defy and break up. To me not in the least.

this is another confusing message for me

for me 'delusion of political suppression' is a horrible thing to accuse someone of and self assessing a 'delusion of political responsibility' is something endeared to me

but it would seem to me someone who calls their own education one of a 'delusion of political responsibility' then i would assume that person thinks political responsibility is unnecessary but then he goes on to say that to 'defy and break up' is not for him..

so does he adhere to political responsibility even though he recognises it as a delusion? if so it would also seem rather unscientific

and of the notion of being 'constructive' it seems you in your comment also have some loose verbage in the same vein:

> although one wonders how much impact a different path might have had too.

impact? how do you measure that? i mean look at your first sentence wherein you say you've read joyce and hardly wells..

so prior to this letter who has impacted you more? you could argue, 'sure, i've read joyce but it went through me' but you still read joyce those words and ideas have a direct influence on you whether you agree or disagree with their content or construction where as an ignorance of wells means his work only indirectly impacts you

i think it is a silly effort to try to measure impact but since you deride joyce's assumed impact i will defend it

joyce was a major influence on the beat generation who were a group of poets in san francisco in the 1950s whose work went on to shape contemporary civilisation by altering legal definitions of words which catalysed a number of the social movements that followed in the coming years

this criticism and response of one of the beat poet's work plays perfectly with this letter:

> His central criticism is that the Beat embrace of spontaneity is bound up in an anti-intellectual worship of the "primitive" that can easily turn toward mindlessness and violence. Podhoretz asserted that there was a link between the Beats and criminal delinquents. Ginsberg responded in a 1958 interview .. "The bit about anti-intellectualism is a piece of vanity, we had the same education, went to the same school, you know there are 'Intellectuals' and there are intellectuals. Podhoretz is just out of touch with twentieth-century literature, he's writing for the eighteenth-century mind. We have a personal literature now—Proust, Wolfe, Faulkner, Joyce." (o)

is wells 'out of touch'? who cares? but speaking negatively about someone else's work to prop up your own, for me, makes me question the quality of your work more than the one you are deriding

(o) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beat_Generation#Criticism

interesting.. what gathered respect for wells were you able to gain from reading this?

the letter is a series of self edifying straw men

to me it reads like someone trying to speak confidently to hide a deeply rooted, or joyce induced, insecurity and ends up coming across as arrogant

at the moment i'm uninterested in the arc of economic studies in acadamia so the opencourseware reading lists seem the wrong place to start for me

can anyone suggest reading to understand how contemporary banks function, where can i get an understanding of a bank or credit union from a software engineer's perspective: dependencies, steps to start, challenges of running, protections from common problems, interesting emerging disruptions;

my impulse on this forum would be to say: create a pull request; but i felt compelled by the importance to at least make your concern about the light degradation known

i sent an email through the contact link suggesting they note this in the instructions and video

if you have any other helpful knowledge i ask you to share it with this group

sure, but concerns like that are why the epipen`cil came to be

in emergencies you are stressed and on a time constraint

if one takes the time to prepare for such an emergency by constructing the epipencil i would hope thae would follow the instructions given carefully, which notes:

7) Inspect carefully to make sure there are no air bubbles, and remove them if present.

i sent them an email requesting that they explicitly describe in the instructions and verbally describe in the video how to ensure the syringe is bubble free

this comment seems wholly unwarranted

how do you think this effort puts thousands of people at risk?

if you download the instruction packet(o) it comes with a Links.txt file that has a link to an instructions video.. which at the time of writing this comment can be found at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldFFJRdhVs8 ; i suggest you watch it

all of the components are 'off the shelf' and the drugs are prescription

from this(i) ~random site epinephrine costs 74.95$ for 30mL, the instructions call for .3mL, that is 100 uses from this 75$ vial, or 75 cents of epineprhine per epipencil

when i read the article i thought this was a great effort that could save the lives of anyone who was unable to bare the new price of the epipen, but now i am wondering what from the epipen warrants the price tag? can a loved one even sue epipen if it malfunctions and kills the intended user?

(o) https://fourthievesvinegar.org/download/#epipencil

(i) http://www.buyemp.com/product/epinephrine-vial

how would you classify mathematics?

exactly

before realising you said 'warning shot' on my first read through of your comment i read it as 'winning shot'

precedent seems to hold more value for a lawyer than the law itself

is that criticism or explanation of affected legal systems?

combined with a project like this:

http://icrobotics.co.uk/wiki/index.php/Turning_the_Raspberry...

and you've basically got the web ;p

at least a one way communication network form