craig1f

I doesn’t happen nearly enough to be worth the effort. Electricity is cheap, and these mobile services are only worth it if they can charge a premium. And they can only charge a premium when a car is literally stranded. And that happens infrequently enough that you may as well just use a tow, which is readily available.

Although, Maxwell’s cover of This Woman’s Work is outstanding.

When my wife and I went to Italy on our honeymoon, and subsequently decided to use carbonated water as a way of dropping our coke addictions, the next few months felt like I was a drug fiend breaking an addiction.

Vegetables tasted so good. Vanilla added to our Starbucks coffee started to taste awful. It felt like a world of taste opening up. Food started to satisfy so much more. It was easier to identify when I was full and avoid overeating.

The sugar industry has so evil and has done so much damage to this country and to the world.

Exactly this. Hydrogen is like crypto. It has just enough interesting tech to attract (using D&D terminology here) high INT, low WIS people.

Hydrogen will probably never work unless someone comes up with a stable molecule that includes hydrogen, is large enough to not move through solid objects, and still retains enough chemical energy to be useful. Ammonium is one option, but it is highly toxic. Only really practical in cargo ships.

Hydrogen also can be useful for inherently expensive things like rockets and jet planes. But never cars.

It was never going to compete with electric. EVs have been slandered for so long that people just assumed we would come up with something better. But EVs are great. Driving an ICE car after being in a Tesla feels like playing a first-person shooter over dial-up.

It would. Yet there is no promising tech in this field. Hydrogen is supported only to draw support away from EVs.

If hydrogen becomes inexpensive to produce, it will by by way of solar power used to generate it.

It will never be easy to store. Hydrogen is the smallest element, and can move through solid objects over time. It is violently explosive. You think these EV fires you see all the time are bad? They're nothing compared to gasoline fires. And gasoline fires are nothing compared to a hydrogen explosion.

I think you have the right definition here.

People aren't rational. They are rationalizers.

Rational thinking is when you use facts and draw a conclusion.

Rationalizing is when you have a conclusion, and you work backwards to justify it with rational-sounding arguments.

Conspiracy theories start with some ridiculous conclusion, and work backwards to make it sound intelligent. It's not intelligent, but it SOUNDS intelligent.

Anger is the emotion we feel when we've run out of rational options. People only get angry when others disagree with them if they don't feel like they can argue their side. They might feel like they can't argue their side for several reasons:

- They don't have an argument - They don't believe the other person will listen to their argument - They don't have time to argue - They're tired and don't want to feel like it - They don't know why they believe what they believe - They know their idea is wrong

Some of the reasons above are rational, some are not. But you don't usually feel anger if you feel like you have a rational path forward. (i.e., you have an argument that you enjoy explaining to people that you believe will listen to).

Question ... were they Reserved instances, or On Demand? IIRC, you still pay for Reserved instances, whether or not they're on.

Most things like this are organized by bad-faith actors that know that his skit wasn't hateful. The powers-that-be have learned how to create viral movements. They know how to get would-be-activists spun up until their brains turn off. These are the left-wing equivalent of Trump-supporters.

People got up in arms about his last stand up. It was not offensive at all. But you couldn't say that, because the people had already made up their minds.

Corporations know how to get people spun up, and they're doing it with Chapelle again. They want to cancel him, because he is dangerous to the right wing, because he is charismatic and articulate. He can get points across clearly. If he became the new Jon Stewart, he could siphon a lot of control away from the right. They need to neutralize him before he decides to go political.

Django is the absolute worst. I just finished two projects with it. It's OO hell full of side effects.

We are using feathersjs now, which solves most of the same problems Django did, but is easier to understand.

5. When unvaccinated people end up in the hospital, hospitals get stressed to their limits. This results in fewer beds for me and my family if we end up in a hospital for a different reason. This is also causing job burnout for nurses and doctors.

It's almost like there is a lot of money devoted to making people think that this is a much larger problem than it is.

People want you focused on a fake enemy, so you won't realize who is really trying to hurt you.

I find that playing music occupies the part of my brain that is easily distracted. This allows the productive part of my brain to work without distractions.

Without music, the easily distracted part of my brain starts looking for distractions, which drags the productive part of my brain along with it.

Tesla monitors battery degradation based on miles driven. If you use your battery as a stationary power source, it messes up their ability to anticipate degradation. So it makes sense.

This is, from the warranty's point of view, the same as manipulating the odometer on an ICE car to make it appear to have driven fewer miles than it actually has.

Not true. Reddit is not targeting silver. This is a widespread lie designed to drive up silver prices.

I feel like Tesla is sort of an opposite situation.

These short-sellers that Reddit is going after, would swamp the media with FUD articles to drive Tesla stock down. They bet on Tesla to lose, and when Tesla didn't lose, they tried to drive them out of business by manipulating the media.

No one has produced any evidence. Allegations aren't evidence.

Incorrect. Republicans have successfully branded themselves as gun advocates, and Democrats as anti-gun. There are as many liberal gun owners as conservatives. Liberals just don't jerk off with their guns on social media.

The thing I like about Elon, is that when he is attacked for not being perfect, everyone goes back to this one thing that happened.

If the worst thing you can bring up about him is that he called a rescue diver a pedophile this one time, he's pretty reliable. This is what, in space, we call an anomaly. They happen. It's ok, until they become a pattern.

It is going to crash for several reasons

1. Trump, and the Senate, are doing everything they can to tank the economy ahead of a Biden victory, so it can be blamed on the democrats 2. Covid 3. When a republican is president, more money can be extracted from our economy, which is what the stock market represents. When a democrat is president, more money is invested in our economy, which is not necessarily the best for the stock market. 4. When a republican is president, they bailout failing companies. Whenever a bailout is imminent, stocks go up. This is because risks have been socialized, meaning that they are no risks. 5. When a republican is president, they lower taxes and pay off corporations more. This results in stock buy-backs. Instead of reinvesting in their company, owners use the money to buy back stock and consolidate power. This buy-back causes prices to spike, due to increased demand and decreased supply. The spike is temporary, because it does not represent an improvement in the company's prospects, just a consolidation of power that benefits no one except the powerful. 6. When Biden wins, all the countries that have been sinking their tentacles into our system to keep a puppet president in power are going to pull back, and do everything they can to make Biden look bad, so that another puppet will get elected that benefits them and harms US interests. We will no longer be slitting our own throats, so the aggression will pick back up. More terrorist attacks, and more clashes with other powers around the globe.

I hate when corporations are like "how can we pretend to care without doing anything of substance".

I know that some asshole with a fountain pen in a board room came up with this idea.

This is the principle behind AWS Glacier

This is what, in marketing, is called "positioning".

VW is trying to "position" their car as the default electric car, or at least, the only viable alternative to Tesla.

If you don't set your own position, then your competitors will set your position for you. Now it's up to Tesla (or whoever else) to re-position VW, without looking nasty doing it. "The ID.3 is good choice if you can't afford the extra $3k for a Tesla. But only a Tesla has all the features you need, and will keep your family alive in an impact". You don't say "Tesla good, ID.3 bad". This makes you sound nasty. You say "ID.3 good if <scenario that doesn't apply to customers>, but Tesla better if <scenario that applies to customers>"

It's all marketing nonsense at this point until the car exists.

Because LinkedIn does exactly what it's supposed to do, and hasn't crossed any lines that we know about?

There, wrote your entire article for you.

This tends to work better with smaller companies.

In my experience, in a small company, the CEO is still involved in the hiring process. If he's highly technical, he can conduct an interview, identify talent, and if it doesn't work out, it's his problem.

As a company grows, the CEO has delegate to people below him. Whether he's technical or not, hiring managers get involved. If a hiring manager hires someone good, degree or not, everything is fine. They don't get bonuses for hiring people without degrees who work out.

However, if an employee has to be fired, there will be a meeting to discuss what red flags there might have been that could have signaled that this person was a mistake to hire. If the hiring manager believes that they'll get in trouble for ignoring the lack of a degree, they're not going hire people without a degree. They might overlook talent, but at least they won't get blamed for messing up and hiring someone unqualified.

This is a good answer. I was talking to someone at a company that actually used questions like this.

He asked me a question like "You're shrunk down to a couple inches in height and put inside a blender. How do you escape?"

My response was "Is there anything else in the blender? Can I see anything nearby?"

He told me that I "already passed", but if it was an interview, we'd probably have a 1 or 2 minute conversation about it and then move on. The fact that I didn't start rattling off ideas, but instead asked smart questions, was what he was looking for.

It's easier to take a measure of someone if they can't figure out what they're being judged on. If they know how they're being judged, they optimize for just that one thing.

In general, 4 years of school is worth 4 years of work experience. The problem being that, without 4 years of school, it's hard to convince anyone to hire you and get 4 years of decent work experience.

Additionally, it's harder to get jobs at larger and more bureaucratic companies without a degree. This is because of risk. If I'm a hiring manager, and I hire you, and you do a good job, everything is fine. If I hire you and you're a disaster, there will be a review as to whether there were any red flags during the hiring process that were missed. If "doesn't have a college degree and sufficient work experience" is found, it'll be used to make me look like I was sloppy for hiring you. If no red flags are found, it'll be chalked up to "there were no red flags. This was just bad luck." and everyone moves on. Knowing this, I probably won't hire you even if I think you're a good risk because it's not worth the risk for me.

Without a college education, you'll need to work for small companies who are willing to take a risk on you. You'll also have to accept really low pay to offset this risk until you've built a decent resume.

All of these things might be better than accumulating student debt. Depends on where you live, what the job market is like, and what connections you have.

Sad but true. As I climb the ladder, all the decisions management use to make that I use to regard is idiotic make a lot more sense to me.

It's so hard to predict which projects will succeed and fail. People will spend time setting up Jenkins pipelines and all kinds of unit tests, and their stuff still breaks. I argued for unit-testing on our current project to add resiliency, and I swear 70% of my energy is fucking unit tests now. Whoops!

I don't think it's this black and white. First, I'm sure plenty of companies are basically stealing from their employees, but this is also situational.

I answer emails and slack whenever I can. On the flip side, I get work from home privileges, I show up when I want, I leave when I want, and I get put on exciting projects instead of boring ones. People who don't check their phones after-hours cannot be trusted to lead projects with demanding clients. I typically don't bill time until my laptop comes out.

I'm two-minds about this. Companies really do abuse their employees and try to get all the work they can out of them. This is a problem that leads to abusive employers. But employees also look for ANY entitlement they can receive, whether or not it is useful to their professional development. This is also a problem that leads to lazy and useless employees. It's sort of a feedback loop. It's also probably very different outside of my field (and probably most people's field on this site), which is software development.

Which is kind of why he wants to go private. Because these rules are designed to prevent the behavior of corrupt CEOs, which he is not. Being public makes him richer, but ties his hands and prevents him from making certain decisions.