and please don't make me elaborate. I've already lost a thousand karma points for bitching that MacOS's finder cant find anything ive done recently.
270 karma · joined September 8, 2012
Basically a sort of family tree of scientific and/or artistic innovators with documentation of their major contributions to their field listed in chronological order, that you can filter down to more specific search parameters.
Like if I wanted to view the "lineage" history of computer science vs history of physics, there should be a lot of common math centric "ancestors" in this weird "genius family tree" im thinking of.
Basically what I like so much about this is that it gives you a pretty good roadmap on how you approach actually learning how data compression theory works in a more linear and straightforward manner than if you were to just look up "data compression" on wikipedia and spelunk around following unknown but educationally perquisite terms.
Was he a person of interest in the lead up to the shootout, who got away, and they were just grasping at straws to discover a list of local area IPs correlated with known addresses he might have been hiding out at so they could obtain a search warrant?
If that's the case, then honestly I don't think this is any worse than when they force say Google or Facebook to provide such data to government.
I don't see why the USA Today should get any special privileges over any other tech company just because they are "media".
If we want to have an argument about the Government abusing it's power to spy on us in general, that's one thing. But the USA Today is literally saying its more important they protect the illusion of their readers "privacy" (which we all know they don't care about your privacy are willing to sell all your personal info to the highest bidder, its in all their TOS) than it is to try and help the cops catch a child predator...
I do agree that this does establish a troubling precedent, but i kinda thought Snowden already made it blatantly clear that the NSA and the CIA is already doing this.
It seems to me that the FBI is basically just trying to play catch up, which we should be concerned about because they are supposedly the agency put in place to police us. Those other agencies are supposedly only supposed to police the world.
(which i never understood why thats supposedly okay. Americans are the only people entitled to their privacy?)
And i know this is true, because ive seen like more than one photo of parents with their new born babies, looking at their screens.
We have to do something about this otherwise were fucked
not only does it fill like 95% of your screen with nothing useful, but all it shows you are the stupid idiots in your life that don't deserve even a decline.
What the hell?
Why?
Why make this torture for people?
Seriously our computers are unusable.
And it wasn't the fact that you cant post google photo directly into facebook and twitter without getting a stupid image.
The tech giants are literally worse than the other two assholes in the world who are making headlines right now.
Why do we just sit back and be okay that finder on a $1500 dollar computer doesn't find shit?
Seriously is there a share button im missing? because im scared to start pressing on random shit ive never seen before.
I haven't used facebook in months, but i just tried and i was confronted with this stupid shit.
omg i cant link to a tweet.
OMG I CANT LINK TO A TWEET.
I cant share a picture here, i cant link to a tweet because the picture is there.
Im seriously going to have to go out of my way right now to upload to an image sharing site.
This is literally the apocalypse. All of our key systems are failing.
In other words if the economy "stops" in the automotive department, how fucked are we in general?
And the number one reason?
Is that obviously apple isnt hiring outside its developer pool. BOOM!
I mean penalize the people who bitch just to bitch, but shouldn't we be like "yeah why is that" when people are bitching about inefficiency?
And if you aren't a fan of what im talking about, why do you vote?
I mean I think this is actually pretty logical because you can't place the solar panel above the top plants because then you are losing the advantage typical horizontal farming gets from being able to directly be fed by the sun, so then you have to place the solar panel next to the plant?
The real question is whether this can save space, is whether you can generate more energy from a solar panel that takes up the same amount of space a plant would require if planted horizontally, than said plant could absorb from the sun directly.
Plants take up much more space than one would expect because their roots branch out further than the actual circumference of the actual plant body itself. So in that way a lot of sunlight is wasted because it hits the extra area of soil the roots need but the actual plant body doesn't. Now if instead of hitting soil, it is instead hitting a solar panel then the general question is whether or not this is creating more efficient use of the sun, because even with a minor improvement in efficiency you should "theoretically" be able to save a considerable amount of space when growing at scale.
Whether it will be cheaper to grow this way, probably not because with vertical farming obviously will come with a ton of logistical problems when it comes to harvesting or maintenance/construction of infrastructure. But I don't see how growing three plants vertically with a solar panel that feeds the bottom two is technically not saving space unless you need more area of solar panels sitting next to them than all 3 plants would consume had you just planted them all next to each other.
In other words would you need 2 or more solar panels + the sun to feed 3 horizontal plants? If so then just plant them horizontally and let the sun do all the work.
As somebody who grew up in California but has been living in oklahoma for the last 13 years, I can tell you that honestly this cold front is seriously exceptional, I mean we've had some pretty cold winters but atleast I haven't experience anything like this.
It's so cold the water is freezing in the lines underground. Its so cold I can actually walk and ice skate on my salt pool right now. The snow is so high in some places that if you threw a cat into the middle of it you know that it will die because there is nothing it will be able to do to see to know which way to go in order to get out.
I mean its absolutely crazy how exceptionally cold this winter was.
And the reality is this.
1.) it's only lasting 4 days and the last time it was recorded being this cold in the midwest was 100 years ago. (which btw it got even colder in oklahoma than it did in texas and we didn't lose power, just food for thought)
2.) It's not a national problem because the coasts don't get as cold. The coldest day in recorded new york city history is -15 f and that was on February 9th, 1934. The coldest day recorded in LA is like the low 40 f, but here in Oklahoma City we've just about hit -15 degrees EVERY SINGLE YEAR SINCE THE THERMOMETER WAS INVENTED.
Like i said we are used to being cold, but we've never actually experienced anything like this before.
3.) Being connected to the coastal grids would mean that if we actually had to use it, we'd end up being forced to saw off limbs in order to pay for it. That is just how capitalism works and therefore we find that it's better for us to be independent because in exchange for having to suffer a power outage every now and then, at least we understand that when we pay for energy here it is going to energy companies who create energy here, who employ people who live here, etc etc.
The midwest doesn't have the same economic opportunities as the coasts have, nor do we receive the same kind of "federal government assistance" when it comes to these matters regardless of which party is in power. Out here poor people vote for lower taxes, because that is the only way they are personally going to see any of that money actually make it's way back to their bank accounts.
4. The problem with winterizing is that you can really only do so much. The issue is more of an implicit limitation of physics than any individual companies negligence out here in the midwest (because as I pointed out, were used to getting cold weather like this every year and it's never been a problem on the scale of a state of emergency until now).
The problem is that if you have to raise the temperature so that you can actually produce energy, you have to use most of that energy you produce to raise the temperature and keep it up, and when you also have a bunch of people who need to use that energy to keep spaces like homes that don't help produce energy, you can see how this situation becomes quickly and increasingly insurmountable. The reality is that energy companies out here know that when they don't do their job well, people out here die.
If your argument is that greedy oil men don't care enough about "grandma baptist" dying to ensure they go above and beyond to ensure our power grid is prepared to "weather the storm" frankly you don't understand that one of the many unwritten rules of capitalism is "It's not considered good business to kill your customer.", while I understand in places like Silicon Valley (be cause like i said i grew up there) the general belief is that Government is king. But out here Business is king. And so while it might be advantageous for a politician to kill off a bunch of old people. It is not advantageous for a business to because in Government you need 75,000,000+ votes to fire the boss. In a corporation you only need like 10 votes to kick out a crappy CEO.
And while there are millions of reasons why it makes sense for us to keep firing our politicians. There is really only one reason why a board of directors will fire it's CEO. And thats because they stop earning. Like I said blackouts aren't good for business, and if you want to argue whether keeping energy surpluses artificially low in order to jack up prices is a problem, then sure let's have that discussion. But lets not pretend that people on the coast are on team "cheap energy" here and lets not pretend that's because they don't know that's the only thing we have that they desperately need.
All im saying if you isolate the politics from the underlying economics and science, you will surely find that nobody's head deserves to roll for this. (unless you can catch mother nature)