sosull

I don't think the analogy quite carries over. With computers there are only a few major operating systems, so the simplification of design directly reduces choice. Cameras are different. There are a vast range of bodies and lenses to combine, all creating different possible images. And people can easily understand the difference between an automatic and a manual camera, or between autofocus, manual and fixed focus. That's just one more choice.

There's an article in the Washington Post today:

> "The root of the problem is an ongoing, 23-year drought, the worst stretch for the region in more than a millennium. Snowpack in the mountains that feed the 1,450-mile river has been steadily diminishing as the climate warms. Ever-drier soils absorb runoff before it can reach reservoirs, and more frequent extreme heat hastens evaporation."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2022/08/1...

A lot of the water in the west comes from snowpack. But there's not going to be much snow anymore, hence there'll be less water.

“Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. Forty percent of all people know that.”

You’re right. The consensus on the dangers of sugar is widely accepted in endocrinology and biochemistry. But a lot of nutritionists argue that a calorie is a calorie regardless of the source – they seem to be startlingly/conveniently naive.

I think the idea runs into the problems experienced by newly-developed rural properties. Small, privately held parcels of land are absurdly expensive to service. Power, water, communications, sewage, food, waste etc. are easier to provide to people who live close together. And then there’s the problem of a social hierarchy of needs. People need someone to turn to in an emergency, input into their immediate environment, and focal points. In that sense land can be cheap, but places are innately costly, not just financially, but socially and historically.

They are oversensitive for sure. But the true mystery is why we, who know better, can’t toughen ourselves up and get over it.

Slightly beside the point, but it is a problem that just doesn’t afflict Apple Music: those folks seem totally happy to make the kind of software that plays albums in sequence. The true surprise is that a century-old function has become a differentiating feature.

I mean, the man was ambushed by cake.

+1, it’s a great piece of software.

I think Honda have returned to at least partial physical controls for heating, air, and music for the Honda e. But it still has a lot of screen.

The US has 5% of the world’s people but 25% of its energy needs. It seems inconceivable that there would be something that money couldn’t buy.

Aren't the Iowa Caucus' days numbered? They've been a complete disaster the last few cycles – it seems to take days/weeks to determine a winner. Their last competently-run caucus was in 2008.

In fairness, writing is a specific skill. Most people aren't very good at it. It's one thing being able to draft an email or a blog post. Even if it has the quality of being clear and sounding empathetic, that doesn't magically turn it into good writing.

This post is the perfect example. It lacks an original premise, a unique sense of language, or an understanding of the relationship between incident and narrative. Most of its core ideas are hokum: 'I think it was the immortal Steve Jobs who said "don't worry about getting wet, just dance in the rain"'.

But Google isn't a writing company. You could work there for a hundred years and never gain the ability to write anything worth reading. There's no evidence that the experience produces unique literary insight. Instead, it seems to create exactly this kind of sludgy, imprecise advice. All of which is unintentionally revealing.

Same sentiment here. Seeing the words 'Mark Fisher' at the top of HN is an utter shock. How is this possible? What else might be possible?

This is really insightful. I appreciate you taking the time to write it.

I'm sure it varies a lot between countries. When I did my masters in Ireland in 2011, the total fee was €5,000. Back then, there was a local government grant that covered the fee plus some living costs. Those grants are harder to get today though.

There's only a small list of countries left to subjugate, so it was inevitable that Britain would turn its ambitions inwards.

I don't know about that – now that she's lost every strategic decision can be made to look wrong. But the real problem was that people just weren't drawn to her as a candidate. The algorithm isn't to blame.

It's good to hear that Germans are so happy. They would have been even happier to learn that TPP is a proposed trade deal between twelve Pacific Rim countries. It never included Germany.

To whom should a country and its taxpayers be culpable in this situation? What would be the appropriate form of punishment?