cbb330

The US doesn’t have enough money to fund the entire distribution

And as a tax payer I prefer discretionary spending for high performers.

The soapbox-vs-megaphone analogy falls apart fast.

Name me one serious, intellectually honest critic of Thiel—say, Malcolm Harris, Evgeny Morozov, Shoshana Zuboff, Mariana Mazzucato, or even random Substackers with 100k+ followers who’s struggling to be heard because Thiel bought all the megaphones.

They all have huge platforms, book deals, TED-level reach, or blue-check amplification. The “undue amplification” crowd never points to a single silenced dissident; they just dislike that Thiel’s ideas are winning in the marketplace anyway.

If every prominent counter-voice already has a bigger megaphone than 99.9 % of humanity ever will, the complaint isn’t about access it’s that voters and readers keep choosing the “wrong” rich guy.

how to not give these people a microphone

Yeah sure, Thiel’s money helped put his protégé Vance in the VP chair, he has real influence, no denying it.

But scroll this comment section for any critique of Thiel and you’ll see the pattern: his wealth gets attacked, his actual ideas almost never do.

Take the “Antichrist Thesis” everyone mocks. It’s Rene Girard-speak for centralized, charismatic authoritarianism that weaponizes morality and scapegoating to grab power. Think Sam Altman preaching about AGI danger while lobbying the gov for openai prioritizing and startup stifling policies. Fed government using big tech censorship for preventing hate speech. He’s been dead-on about that danger for decades.

Sorry, but that take is complete garbage.

Wanting to “collectively figure out how to take away the microphone” from rich people you dislike isn’t a brave stance against inequality, it’s straight-up authoritarian censorship based on net worth. In a free society, people choose who gets attention. If you don’t like Thiel, out-argue him or ignore him, but don’t fantasize about silencing citizens because they’re successful. And honestly, Thiel’s worldview has real strengths: he’s been early and right on remote work, the stagnation of atom-based industries, the broken incentives in higher education, the dangers of bureaucratic overreach, and the need for bold technological breakthroughs instead of endless regulation. PayPal, Palantir, SpaceX (as an early investor), and backing young founders through the Thiel Fellowship have created massive value and progress. Dismissing all that because he’s rich and contrarian is lazy.

PBS is not simply Bob Ross and Mr Rogers. for example, PBS NewsHour

Also NOAA receives significant funding for climate change efforts primarily from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act

can you dive a bit deeper into the comparison with spark rdd

investigative journalists conclude that water is, in fact, wet

Flutterfoundation.dev

Was created for flock?

This seems less of a fork and more of an attempted annex

If you contribute your expertise to improve the skill tree you can even get a cool sticker.

https://github.com/sjpiper145/MakerSkillTree?tab=readme-ov-f...

How far will the fossil fuel industry go to protect itself from climate impacts it helped cause?

As far as their customers take them :)

- sent from my iPhone which was delivered to me via fossil fuels

lets all do the popular thing and judge Tesla’s software reliability by a headline and the opinion of someone on the internet

Agreed, as I’m familiar as a buyer and with friends who work at MBUSA in dealer inventory.

I like dbeaver for browsing DDL, list of tables, examples of schema, data types. also, to edit a few rows here and there as a quick test/fix to something. because its easier to click around than write many 2 line sql to do the same thing.

But, I often use jupyter notebooks for the DML aspect of hard queries and data anlysis, for the power of dataframes and repeatable cells mixed with documentation and sharing.

So all that to say, anyone know if there is a DDL browser equivalent ideal for jupyter notebooks / ipywidgets?

https://www.infoq.com/news/2023/07/linkedin-protocol-buffers...

https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-...

https://gdpr-info.eu/

this plus lack of performance eval/culture/strategy to grow responsibly and enable future success

its a great learning experience though despite what people say about the inability to learn the new hot hot tech. the nuance of software development is the decisions that other people make, that is inescapable and is a skill worth developing. i'm not buying the "just do a startup" because i think its a cop out.

Yes. We hired everyone from meta starting in 2020 and so far this strategy is holding true

The top 1/3rd of Eng don’t see it as immutable. But the stack can consist of 10 other teams tools, and you’re not rewarded for the amount of time you’re spending to fix other people’s stuff. So it goes on

Preface: I’m not in front end or flagship teams so I’m saying hearsay.

The initiative Chris refers to is still alive but likely hasn’t made any meaningful progress. These things tend to have a lot of fan fair and then suddenly leave the front conscious of the company as we get a new GDPR/DMA fire to put out. at that point it will be dead. Or, it will stay alive for 2+ years as slowly but surely 50% of clients migrate to it and see even poorer performance.

There was a blog here a few months ago about migration from restli to grpc. It’s still going on, and nearly every app i see is still restli.

TIL jugaad haha.

Yea, give everything 3x estimate because everything that can break will break along the way.

Fresh clone of master won’t build, the local build command is broken, gradle, remote build, GitHub, staging is an inside joke, prod host os upgrades, dependencies bumped in repo, http dependency’s network route changed, etc. etc. etc.

I work at LinkedIn now. Chris’s role and the podcast describes ember and front end web dev. I think the LoC and build he’s referring to could be voyager-web. Our monolith flagship web app. And, there’s more systems at LinkedIn with MM lines of code and long builds example is the mid tiers, the offline data stacks, the metrics systems, KafkaKafkaKafka.

Unfortunately, 17min to build is pretty good. 17min without a transient infra failure is very good.

Anyways, AMA

“Comparing max wind capacity to actual outputs from dams is nonsensical. Wind typically produces 30% or less of its max capacity over any period of time and it does so unreliably. The energy from damns is much more valuable.”

America is the type of country to do negative “human” perspective actions for purely environmental reasons:

https://www.government-fleet.com/10193319/military-charging-...

1. Your reply to parent said dams’ output is small

2. parent refutes the data

3. You reply again with same message

Can you address the parent’s concern that the data you’re reporting is incorrect? (Solar metrics are based on max / theoretical output and not real output)

your mind also conjectures many unreasonable and illogical solutions to things. then separately your mind has an "evaluator" to deduce a set of solutions down to things that make sense.

Is anyone saying LLMs in isolation and without contextual tooling are miraculous? Even the text box for chatGPT is a form of wrapping LLM in a UX that is incrementally more miraculous.

Scroll to the bottom.

i'm not sure you fully read my comment.

my example posted is an example of how business interests are relevant to how livable the planet is for humans.

and then my quote is almost word for word what they said in the article.

their quote: "It seems the regulation in New Mexico has had an impact without hurting business"

my paraphrase: "yeah it seems like New Mexico doin real good with more laws"

They need to provide much, much much more proof because as regulation can have net negative affect then the burden is on them.

double the amount of the gas than in New Mexico, per unit of production, since 2019.

when we look at data at scale, we use p99 metrics to get more insight into the average. because this article, i'm assuming, is just using average, the metric here does not have enough information. There could be just one incident in texas over 4 year period that affects the average per unit of production.

Despite increasing its own oil production in recent years, New Mexico has no site with repeated methane leaks, unlike in Texas,

Why not deep dive into root cause of a few of these abusers? Blameless post mortem to assess what must be changed with very specific examples of issues.

Are we wrong to request a higher bar for journalism / research from Kayrros?

My conclusion on hackernews being "pro-regulation" is based on observance that posts discussing the downside of regulation are often downvoted.

I agree with what you said. Knowing that repealing regulation is much less frequent than producing new regulation -- we should assume all new regulation is high risk, since its' impact is known to have tradeoffs, is to some degree created from perverse incentives and minority interests, and once in place is immutable. Regulation can be good and it can be bad.

So if we know that regulation carries high risk, we need to be very apprehensive to anyone calling for more regulation such as this article via "https://www.kayrros.com/". We don't know who they are, what they want, and what their suggested change in policy affects in net to humanity over time.

I guess what I want is for companies like "https://www.kayrros.com/" to be held to a higher bar and be more responsible for the outcome of their research and conclusions.

I know the hackernews crowd is very pro-regulation, so before downvoting please consider responding so we can have a discussion and share experience together.

"It seems the regulation in New Mexico has had an impact without hurting business"

Assuming that oil has some net affect on humanity -- pros and cons. Then we need to consider the net affect of oil produced by texas on humanity, and consider how that net affect is changed with more regulation.

Simply saying "yeah it seems like New Mexico doin real good with more laws" is extremely dangerous, because most regulation DOES harm and destroy market affects and competitive businesses. The authors on the study here should AT LEAST report with due diligence on this before requesting for increased regulation and attempting to sway public opinion -- potentially having a net NEGATIVE affect on humanity.

One possible example of not considering the net negative affect of regulation, is, for example, if there are many competing energy companies in texas, and there is a consumer demand for more responsible operations, then those competing energy companies are forcing each other to tighten their operations wrt environmental impact. However, if regulation destroys small producers and benefits big corporations, then we would see LESS competition and LESS Priority from companies to tighten their operations, negatively affecting the environment.