HN user

chesimov

90 karma
Posts0
Comments62
View on HN
No posts found.

I have recently moved to a macbook pro for work, having used Ubuntu on my prior machine. In my experience, the mac (despite having significantly more modern specs) is more buggy and just not quite as snappy for these little things. Opening windows, menus, terminals takes longer (even with the swoopy animations turned off). Wake from sleep also takes longer, and a few times a week it is frozen for a few minutes on wake. Maybe I have a lemon.

Some people say this kind of populist stuff (and worse) on campus here too. I feel like some of the polarising optimisations in social media that have happened in the US etc spill over to here - but the stakes are much higher here.

My anecdote: In undergraduate engineering, a lot of the people around me were on ritalin. I never felt disadvantaged because I felt it didn't give anyone a clear advantage in the hardest subjects like mathematics or nonlinear control. From what I saw, it didn't seem to improve intelligence that much; rather it helped the distractable people to not get distracted from studying for example.

This is something I wonder about. I'm certain they never delete anything, because in aggregate all that data is surely very valuable and will be for years to come. However, I hope that by marking it for deletion, it becomes more likely that it gets stored on increasingly distant/cold media, increasing the likelihood that over the years it gets overwritten or corrupted or some drives fail. If times get difficult, maybe they'll mark my data as low priority, and let it get overwritten to save some money. Can anyone shed some light on this - is this just wishful thinking? Is storage too cheap?

Another thing I wonder about: perhaps if some companies want your facebook data, they might pay a rate and see all current information on your facebook. By deleting your data, you've denied these lower-tier companies from accessing it. I suspect that with enough money, they could buy access to deleted posts too. But such companies are probably fewer in number.

It was a different time - my understanding is that having a multiply redundant system was important for an isolated pariah state. Think of it like the strategic petroleum reserves in certain isolated states of today. Of course none of that was necessary once SA rejoined the global community. This extra capacity could have been carefully mothballed for later use; instead we are now building 2x brand new coal stations, each of which will be the largest coal plants in the world.

Fair point, but choosing the electricity crisis as an example is not helping your claim - the Apartheid lot left us with something like 50% overcapacity and almost the cheapest electricity in the world at the time. We actually have less electricity generating capacity right now than at that time. The lack of generting capacity has severely constrained our economy since. When the crisis first bit in the 2000s, many mines had to shut down for the first time in 200 years of continuous operations.

The government had an initial plan to redirect overcapacity in many areas (not just electricity) to rolling out services to those neglected by the Apartheid govt, and then after that to start building infrastructure again (not sure of specifics, maybe 5 years on?). The problem is that in most cases, this never happened. Hence the limits of most infrastructure are gradually being hit, with a knock-on effect for the economy.

Well, there's an exodus from the rest of the country to the W. Cape. They call it 'semigration'. Property was up 12% a while ago when all other provinces saw a decline I think (except Gauteng; they were up 3%). As a young person of the wrong demographic here though, myself and most of my friends are preparing for possible departure for a few different reasons. If you are already established in a field with an overseas nest egg that can't be touched by SA inflation though, then Cape Town is probably one of the best cities to live in on the planet. If you know what you're doing, living here is fantastic.

The people you are speaking about, the Bushmen, were wiped out by the Nguni pastoralists and the European settlers. A few descendents remain. They are not in power here. As for Westerners... they haven't been in power for more than 20 years (if you call the Apartheid government western?). Infrastructural development has slowed down mostly due to graft. Secondly, we are talking about a tiny region of Southern Africa. The rest of it is mostly fine.

There is at least one self-sufficient desalination ship for hire that could apparently just about cover the entire city's needs on its own. It is also apparently very exensive so we are hoping to avoid that. I'd expect that's the kind of company that would be useful in these sorts of disasters.

On point 4 - my understanding is that the poorest areas (which are at most risk of disease outbreaks) will not have their water cut. Rather, everyone else will have their water cut first while some water still remains in the dams, which is specifically allocated for those areas and will last long enough until the mid-year rain. I last read this a while ago though, so things may have changed.

Thanks for your explanation, I did not know that this was the case. I had until now assumed that words are a kind of medium for conveying the underlying thoughts which are abstract and exist separately. Observations like this make me wonder if actually there might be quite substantial differences from person to person when it comes to thinking and perception.

What do they mean by putting things into words? When thinking, it seems that the assumption is that we are silently putting our thoughts into <insert language> words? This is by experience not the case anyway, right?

I exercise because it's fun, and allows me to do fun things like hiking in the wilderness. It's much more fun to hike when fit. Also cardiovascular exercise improves many aspects of brain function, which I'd regard as a plus.

Such a line of thinking is at odds with the ideologies of our time. If it were true, it would diminish the potency of many concepts like inherited privilege. Imagine if people were privileged in their intelligence in large part due to their genetics, and not only because of societal considerations? I don't think this would be welcomed in the current zeigeist.

Edit: I agree with danharaj's sentiment. The potential for abuse of power is increased by such lines of reasoning.