zizee

> maybe there’s a large, quiet group that is not well represented

Often referred to as the "silent majority".

> My left wing and right wing friends are pretty centrist in my estimation.

I think this is many (?most?) people's experience, whilst media (social/traditional) are geared towards demonizing both "sides", to increase engagement. I say "sides", because most people's opinions skew left/right depending on the issue in question, rather than fitting perfectly into the stereotypical archetypes.

firefox reader mode also works a treat (on mobile at least)

Thankyou, I will check it out :-)

Love that book. Sled Driver is also worth checking out. It focuses on things from the pilots perspective, but from memory the pilots had to have a fairly intimate understanding of their vehicles, so a lot of discussion of the mechanics/engineering.

Offtopic: Skunkworks, and Master's of Doom are two of my favourite non fiction books, and they both had a similar vibe. Liftoff (Eric Berger) was another. Can people recommend more books like this?

The prize would have been offered as "1 million dollars^"

^ see terms and conditions

Care to share your txt file?

The article is about someone who was arrested for social media posts made years before arriving in the country. "Keeping it in your pants for the week or two while you are there" does not cut it.

Hopefully these news stories will help educate people about the risks involved with travel to certain countries.

I haven't looked at what your yaml is looking like, but I encourage you to consider having sensible defaults for most resource types (including their existence), and provide a way for Devs to go off the rails if they need to. Sensible defaults can get simpler use cases 95-100% of the way there, relieving the burden for app Devs to have good understanding of everything that is going on under the hood.

Perhaps the issue is not the writing of the YAML, but the need to have a good understanding of all the resources/primatives in order to get things glued together. Many application developers just want to focus on their application, and not on all the nuances of subnets, security groups, autoscaling thresholds etc.

The comment I was responding to was specifically talking about oil and gas futures. Not general stock prices, or which projects are started.

My non-expert understanding is that Futures are a specific financial instrument with set expiry dates, and are about locking in prices for these commodities at a certain date. The vast majority of these would be expiring in under low digit years. I am arguing that the ramp up time for fusion to go from "feasible design" to "having a significant impact on the the amount of oil/gas consumed" is much longer than most futures expiry dates, and would therefore have little impact.

That said, I guess people can (and do) buy futures with expiry dates for more than 10 years out, presumably they just have to find a counter party. Is this a significant amount invested? Bringing me back around to my original (and honestly asked) question: How many years out do oil/gas futures project?

I understand what they are saying.

I am saying that the timeframe between a breakthrough in fusion, and it having a measurable effect on energy usage is so large that "money" will not reflect it with immediate and large moves in the market.

This doesn't sound right to me. How many years out do oil/gas futures project? Even if someone from the future arrived today with blueprints of a perfect fusion power plant design, it would take many years to build up enough fusion power plants to make a dent in the world's oil/gas consumption. You'd not only need to switch over power plants, but replace every car, truck, house, ship, smelter, xxxx to use electricity.

This is largely a result of low barriers to entry into the profession. You do not need to have a qualification from an accredited institution to be a practicing software engineer/programmer/developer.

Unlike doctors, lawyers, dentists, civil engineers...

So you have a well paying profession, hot demand, good working conditions, and no external framework to ensure a base level of competence. Of course people will try and game the system (wittingly or otherwise).

IMO this is a good thing. It allows people from all walks of life to get into the industry, and has helped it to grow more rapidly. But it does introduce a big issue, that its very difficult to know if someone is an expert, or just trying to fool you (and perhaps themselves) into thinking they know what they are talking about.

I find Whittakers (from NZ) to be a great alternative. Ever since Australian Cadbury's changed their recipe, it seems to give me a "burning" sensation. Whittakers tastes like a decent supermarket chocolate used to taste like.

Interesting. This might be explained by the switch from old growth to new growth^. Older trees would be larger, and have more core to work with (I think knots are mostly from the outer layers of the tree).

^ this is pure speculation

I'm really curious to know why, in our hyper-industrialized world of today, is lumber so expensive when compared to yesteryear? Is it cost of land on which it grows? Is it increased demand because of population growth? Increased demand because of new uses? Increased demand because of global markets? Is it because lumbar prices were artificially depressed because the cost of growing new trees was not included (because people were just cutting down what was already there). Maybe it is because land/housing prices have gone up so much, people are just willing to spend more as it is a relative small percentage of the total cost of housing?

Another way to look at it is that educational systems are setup to favour girls over boys.

Typically when we see outcome differences between two groups in a system, most people will blame the system... unless they think it's good/natural for one group to do worse than the other.

The ISS is in a low enough orbit that it is protected by the earths magnetosphere.

I think your missing the point I am trying to make. Hint: It's not for my gratification, I am not asking people to show sympathy.

Ironically, you accuse people of "strawmanning", and then proceed do the same to me.

Perhaps take a leaf out of your own book and stop assuming intent.

Have a splendid day.

Sure thing, I get that. There are around 1500 people listed as being involved in the making of the matrix resurrections. That is a lot of people. But I'd bet that the vast majority of them did not work on it full time, for over 6 months each:

From Wikipedia:

> Filming started in February 2020 but was halted the next month by the COVID-19 pandemic. Wachowski toyed with the possibility of shelving the project and leaving the film unfinished, but the cast insisted that she finish it. Filming resumed in August 2020, concluding three months later.

I am happy to admit I don't really know what I am talking about. All my info is either a quick google and some gut feelings around projects. Happy to be told otherwise by someone with experience in the industry, or with references.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Matrix_Resurrections

https://m.imdb.com/title/tt10838180/fullcredits

Well the grandparent responded to a comment observing no sympathy being shown, with a comment that showed no sympathy, instead with reasoning for why it's worthwhile, and downplaying any suffering. I am not saying dexwiz was encouraging/promoting suffering of pigs, but they were ignoring the original call to express sympathy to these animals.

someone did this for a tweet as well...

Well, the total cost was reported as $190 million, so after the 1000 people get 100k, there is still 90mil to account for...

I'm probably not up with the times, but I don't really see many actors in that film that would be classed as A-list (although the definition of that is somewhat loose).

I really like Keanu, and he seems like a great guy, but I don't think he getting paid $20 million a film, although his popularity seems on the rise again (but perhaps that is just on Reddit). He was reportedly paid 2.5mil for some of the John Wick films, and you'd have to imagine he is the top paid in this latest matrix film.

Regardless, I have already said I don't know much about the industry, and I haven't even seen the film, so it is all just speculation on my end. However, I'm willing to bet that a significant percentage of the reported spend went to subsidiaries charging healthy margins, which is common in the industry to help cut into the % of profits the studio would have to share with people as part of their contracts.

Sure, perhaps it can be justified by the greater good, but that should not preclude feeling sorry for the animal in question.

I have always assumed those numbers are fudged, and included marketing.

I don't really know much about the industry, or what it take to make a film like this, but $100m is enough to pay 1000 people 100k. Did this film take that many people, that long to make?

I would imagine CGI is reducing a lot of expensive things (like blowing up aircraft, and expensive location shoots).

Not sure where I read it, but someone was saying that whilst the numbers don't work for the ramjet, the magnetic funnel could still be useful in slowing a craft on its approach to another solar system. Does this study rule that our as well?

It doesn't appear to work for Australian employers, so it does not seem to cover every country, and I would guess it is mostly north american?

Do other countries have similarly scummy services? Is there one for Australia? My gut says "yes". What should we google to find similar things in our locale?

This is a really nice write-up of the highs and lows of launching an indie game. It resonates with me as I often dream of locking myself away for 6-12 months to crack out an indie title. I dream of fame and fortune, but the sad truth is thatost do not break even. One day when I can "retire", I'll just publish games for fun...

Perhaps this is true for covid19, as the vaccines do not seem to stop the vaccinated from getting infected and spreading the virus. But for vaccines that actually stop the majority of vaccinated from becoming infectious the risk reward calculation changes.

All vaccinations have some level of risk. If you are surrounded by unvaccinated, your risk of not getting the vaccine outweighs the risk of catching the disease from the herd. In this instance you have aligned incentives.

However, if you are in a entirely vaccinated population, your risk profile changes, and it is now possible for your incentives to become unaligned with "the team", or at least more blurry.

Unfortunately the average antivaxer's mental model is probably not so well defined that they realise is what they have been doing. I would not be surprised if the majority of them don't realise/agree that they've been selfishly coasting on the coat-tails of the crowd with other vaccines/diseases, and therefore they have trouble realising their currently "successful" strategy is not going to work so well this time round.