sushisource

That is really amazing, but I'd just like to point out how amusing it is that he looks really tired in the thumbnail of that video.

I think this is the type of magical thinking that pervades a lot of these ag startups.

Just because you noticed "Hey, this unpopular grain grows so easily it's popping up from the sidewalk!" does not mean you can actually then go and scale that to providing food for hundreds of millions of people.

We developed modern agriculture the way we did for a reason. Some of those reasons are no longer valid, true, but a whole lot of them are still very very pertinent.

I think vertical farming / rooftop farms / etc are at this point largely an exercise in virtue signaling more than they are actually improving the food system. They might be improving it for high-income Whole Foods types who are upset Amazon owns their favorite store now (ie: us here on HN) - but those people aren't exactly the ones who need to see improvement.

To be devil's advocate, he never said it wasn't still the right move, just that perhaps the (subtextual) motivation was less than benevolent.

Not without some substantial delay. The stock market and the housing market are definitely correlated, but not perfectly so.

Oh I'm assuming a mortgage is still involved. Buying a house purely with cash is a stupid move when the fed is handing out free money. Debt is a great tool if you use it correctly.

If you're staying in the same market and you already own, then it doesn't matter much. What matters more is that your other investments are relatively outperforming the house (likely already true because of the Fed's money printer).

If you don't already own, waiting for a drop might be wise, but if you're going to sell stock to do it, you might wanna do it now. I'm looking at trading up to a new place right now and that's my plan.

It is surprisingly hard. The mental arithmetic killed me, I'm just not fast enough at it. Still apparently too smart to be a cop...

Jesus that's some rookie stuff right there

Agreed. People so rarely bring passion to the job. In fact, they often react with hostility when encountering someone who is genuinely passionate about software (to my mind, because they feel it reflects back on them poorly).

I think the industry is totally wrong about the type of activity that programming is. It's a creative endeavor, not a mechanical one. The best people are the ones who derive joy from it, not just a paycheck.

Not to mention the fact that I suspect most people interested in purchasing fine art aren't exactly the type who care to finance the purchase.

I think that's partly why some commenters think the article isn't all that valuable. IMO, it really does not at all apply to the Dems/Republicans fight. If you've spent any amount of time with people who actually work in politics, it's readily apparent there's no kind of mutual collusion between the parties. They can barely even "collude" internally to advance their agendas.

The whole thing is just a contest for who can get the most pithy soundbite for the day. It's horrible and ineffective and stupid but there's no "Republicans and democrats are working together to.... do exactly what?" conspiracy.

OK, but, knowing this, how is it somehow "unfair" that you can't... what... steal this land from the people who have it now so you can drop out of society?

That seems just as unfair, but from a different perspective.

This might be one of the stupidest arguments I've ever heard:

“Thin copyright might apply to a doll or a painting because, for example, there are just so many ways to paint a tomato,” Busch said. “Creative choices are limited. It has never applied to music because there are literally an infinite number of creative choices in creating a song.”

... So you're saying there aren't infinite ways to paint a tomato?

Eh.... On the flip side, processing and storing some simple text forms should be able to handle 1000s of simultaneous users on one box.

So, probably like most software of this nature, the reason it's not scaling is simply because the people who made it probably weren't the greatest engineers on the block.

Can anyone explain to me why PDF persists as the most common document format for "official" correspondence? It's absolute dog-vomit of a format, just unbelievably overwrought and unfriendly. I wince every time I have to sign one, or, god forbid, actually fill in some form.

Is the explanation really as lame as "They were there first and it stuck"?

Nothing OP said implied all accounts should become verified. Simply that it should be an option for everyone.

They still donated to a zoo. I'm ok with them acting like little kids in exchange.

I love explainers like this, but it frankly makes me a little angry that the vast majority of the math teachers I had in highschool and college taught in the awful way described in the setup to the piece.

Why is that? Has anyone studied it, or is there even a solid anecdotal explanation? The best one I can imagine is many of these professors simply don't care much for teaching and are more focused on their research, which is still infuriating but at least an explanation.

I ended up with an undergrad in applied math, though I'm a software engineer now. I like math, but I feel like I never got to be all that great at it. I suspect I would've enjoyed it more and achieved more with explanations like these.

It makes for a good setup for the piece, but the whole "do or don't carboload before endurance racing" is still very much a subject of debate.

Or the "queue album/song" functionality. It's amazing how absolutely dogshit the Spotify UX is. I keep using it because they have the best selection / device compatability but god the UI is just awful.

I suspect the author is exaggerating a bit when he says it's the only way he thinks. I also have the "narrative voice" but I absolutely can think about things without the voice, it just doesn't feel as much like "thinking", if that makes sense.

There are some things that are explicitly visualized, like an object I'm thinking about, where I wouldn't say in my head "I am imagining the sun. It is bright. Etc. etc.". I'd just picture the sun, and my "narrative" would probably be about why I was thinking about the sun, not describing it.

Same applies for more abstract concepts, just without the visualization.

I totally get that, but, she wasn't moving or anything. Just going on a weekend visit somewhere and wanted to bring the dog.

Hire a dog sitter, maybe? Or as another commenter mentions, if you care that much, pay for a seat for your non-service dog. Something many airlines still let you do, you just have to pay for it.

I remember being in an airport and having a woman I was sitting next to openly admit to me that her dog she was bringing on the plane she had "just went online an registered as an emotional support animal so I can take him with me". Clearly implying she did not, in fact, require an ESA.

I just remember being so blown away that she assumed a stranger would be 100% on board with this tactic as to tell me about it unvarnished that I was stunned into silence.

I love dogs, but you're ruining everything for the people who actually need service animals.

This position pretty brazenly ignores the reality that global population is, you know, maybe just a little bit higher than it was 10,000 years ago?

The worst is just empty buildings waiting for a tenant that blaze lights 24/7

Additional support: Most good novelists lived interesting lives

Seemingly (IANAL) he could, in fact, do that. I think his concern would be if he's not properly maintaining it, now the beach near his house is going to fill up with trash, maybe overnight campers, etc. So he's either got to foot the bill to keep it looking nice, or end up with a garbage beach.

So it's definitely a sticky situation. Personally, I'd just open it up, I think people generally treat beaches OK in Cali, but I can imagine his concern.

As another commenter mentions, it seems like a very reasonable expectation that the state would maintain it.

There would without question at least be debate over whether we should do that, and that's really my original point. It seems highly, highly unlikely that alien societies would all come to this same conclusion, unless you're willing to assume they all think fairly uniformly -- but we would be a clear exception to that, and so we've come full circle.

It's a great book but I'm surprised by how many people find the dark forest theory convincing -- it pretty clearly makes this assumption that all (or, at least many) alien civilizations are ruthless, calculating game theorists, and don't share any moral concepts with us. Of course, they don't have to, but I find it unlikely that societies that made it so far wouldn't have the same basic concepts around "don't kill people for less-than-justifiable reasons" as we do.

I like the follow up novel Redemption of Time for this reason, it has some passages about maybe there are other galaxies where the dark forest isn't at all the case, and I find that concept about the same level of plausibility.

I have most reason to doubt 8. I think it'll mature, but I doubt a fully "standard" stack will come about.

I suspect WASM will lead to a lot less stuff being done in JS.