jaegerpicker

Thing is that's overly simple thinking IMO, throwing off the cultural legacy literally means replacing it with something else. Culture has a legacy, what comes before, and it's literally impossible to not have one. So that Mohawk is replacing a "normal" haircut, replacing a "normal" culture. There is nothing ironic about showing your child that it's ok to choose something outside the mainstream normal culture, especially if you have done so. It's the whole point. The Mohawk said and meant "I reject your culture and choose my own", it would be ironic to have chosen that and then teach your kid to be in the mainstream culture.

Interesting bug: if you swipe on screen with the mouse button pressed and slide of screen to release the mouse button the on screen swipe action stays attached to the mouse cursor. Only sort of a bug because it's only because it runs in a web page vs on an actual phone. Still would be interested in how to fix that in general.

Overall it looks cool, I'm a native mobile app guy so I'm always skeptical about mobile web. This doesn't change that for me but I can see growth in the web platform for mobile.

I think it is slowing down, almost undeniably slowing down. Hitting a wall? I don't think that's fair but slowing down for sure. Which follows the tech hype process, an engineer(s) make great progress on a problem, an "idea" guy hypes it to the moon and sells it for as much money as possible by promising the moon, and then the tech "fails" to deliver the moon. Even the tech was never meant to deliver said moon.

Funny that you say what on Earth are you comparing us to. It's just that Earth, look at the time it takes for purely biological evolution to take place. Flight is estimated to have first evolved 350 million years ago in insects, then dinosaurs 220 million years ago, then birds, and bats 60 million years ago. From insects to bats is 290 million years. It took us less than 100 to go from basic flight to leaving the planet. On nearly any scale we humans have evolved and adapted on an unprecedented timescale. Hell, humans only evolved 100,000 years ago or so. It's a blink of the eye compared to literally everything else on our planet.

Prove this, because I'm pretty certain this is not the case. I helped build a messaging app for iOS (Technically a TeleHeath app that needed to accept MMS/SMS also) and I saw absolutely none of this. That was a few years ago so it's possible it's changed but I'd have to see actual documentation for that. Otherwise I firmly believe this is BS and completely made up.

I'm a web developer and native app developer but I'm also a user. If I want to use a service and they have a message saying "for the best experience, use <other os>" I will never use that service again. There are no apps or services that would cause me to switch. So you can take that stance but you are just hurting your app because you as a developer don't want to learn native apps.

Every single thing is political. What you eat? political Religious? political What TV show you watch? political What job you do? political. Welcome to modern America where every single thing is a political us vs them shit show. This is the county we as citizens have let be forced on us.

Simple fact most Red's don't want to associate with Blue's and it's the same on the other side. Sure individuals won't agree but they are a minority. If you don't like the project, then just move on it has NOTHING to do with you.

Except Reddit doesn't have a product if they don't have people reading it. The TERRIBLE UI and user experience means that a percentage of users will only use reddit via 3rd-party apps. Apollo is BY FAR the best client. This isn't capitalism, it's self-harm by stupidity. Reddit's only value is the user eyes and data. Remove the users and Reddit dies a quick death. Maybe they will still pull in users but having less value but charging more to drive away your Users sure seems like a dumb plan capitalism or not.

I've been involved with Software Development for over 20 years started with VB6 and some perl/python in 1998. I saw the "informal code of conduct" and it never worked. What really happened: many people were treating terribly and most of it was swept under the rug. CoC were created for valid and good reasons. I'm not defending the Rust community here, it seems childish to me. The past is not what you are trying to claim it was in this post. Look up the MANY Rails conference sexual harassment issues and worse.

We should not whitewash the past because the present isn't what we want.

It's really difficult to give you a useful answer. Some teams have succeeded and some have failed. It depends on the product, the team, and the user base. I've built and worked on both native mobile apps (swift and kotlin) and cross platform (react native and flutter). Personally I would choice native and have for my projects. That being said I personally hate the JavaScript eco system and language so to me it slows everything down. I'm faster (not twice as fast though) and much better in the native platforms. That doesn't mean your team will be. Who you hire and what the product is will matter more than which tech you use IMO.

I think we have a slightly different use case as I'm mostly collecting sensor data for ag automation on a homestead scale and I'm a python programmer already but for me python has been impossible to beat so far. The combination of easy of use, the massive ecosystem, and wide spread support/internet resources make it hard to beat IMO.

I've started to believe that the aspirations that our culture promotes and pushes are the problem itself. Instead of creativeness Western culture promotes monetary success. Instead of happiness in a family we dream of making a billion dollars in a startup. Instead of dreaming about exploring the galaxy we dream about private space travel and mining. Instead of solving humanities greatest challenges via learning and science we push private businesses profiting from half fixes and pointless changes (carbon credits or slow introduction of electric vehicles without public infrastructure as examples). I'm not against people being rewarded for their work but the reward has become more important than the work itself. This is likely a result of the huge wealth inequality Western culture is dealing with, when someone has dramatically less they are always drawn to those that have more and are willing to do almost anything to get there.

I'm not sure where you are located but in Northern New England this is very untrue. Maine, New Hampsire, and Vermont all have a LARGE number of diy log cabins built. I've stayed in several and I'm in the early planning of building a house (not log cabin, it's a long house with builtin green house/barn sections similar to the long house on the Apple TV show home). There are many places in the US that allow you to DIY your own home, though the majority are very rural which is a MASSIVE benefit IMO.

I have production apps in the store with SwiftUI so it's not a fact at all. These are non-toy apps. UIKit is more mature but it hasn't matter at all in my experience.

Yeah, I'd agree with the underground part. Above ground vertical greenhouse's are absolutely viable but I'm not sure underground would make any sense. LED grow lights I'm using on Tower or aeroponics (Plants grown in towers with a gravy mist based irrigation and feeding) are much less than 30-40 watts / square foot, around 10-20 depending on the time of year but that's above ground in a greenhouse situation with Sun light help.

WHAT MATH?!?!? Electricity doesn't have any thing to do with it except in very tiny amounts. You need light coverage not heat wattage! There is no math to do! Photosynthesis doesn't work like that. It's a chemical reaction to light wavelengths. I posted numerous papers detailing this. The unit of measure is PPFD Photosynthesis Photon Flux Density, that's the coverage of the number of light wavelengths the plant can absorb. LED's provide plenty of PPFD's, exactly the same as the Sun. So all you need is the correct amount to cover your growing space with a minimum amount.

That's actually a good question, I have no experience with underground systems. Most are free standing greenhouses (about 10x more efficient (water and yield) that traditional farming per square foot). Electric is only a major cost for the pumping of water, LED light coverage is very cheap and we don't need to compete with the power of the sun.

In what way? Photosynthesis is about light wavelength's and water is easy to be more efficient since the plants are in water instead of soil. There are numerous successful commercial operations already. Also I've posted a ton of detail on the measurements elsewhere in this thread. When people measure efficiency most measure Wattage from the Sun and that's completely irrelevant.

IT'S COMPLETELY IRRELEVENT, the efficiency at generating electricity is not what powers photosynthesis. It's a chemical reaction to light wavelengths (ie the absorbing of Red and Blue light) that powers it. More watt's doesn't equal more growth, it equals more heat which allows longer growing seasons. LED's and Sunlight have EXACTLY the same level of photosynthesis, none of the math you did matters at all. For LED's you need to calculate coverage of the area not pure power. If you produce Red or Blue wavelength's that's all that matters, the Sun does that and a hell of a lot more but we don't need the power of the sun or even a tiny faction of it's power for photosynthesis, we need to heat and cool and creat weather which effect plant growth but Watt's is irrelevant.

Wrong question to ask, PPFD's is the correct measure. It's not a direct energy comparison. Photosynthesis is a chemical reaction of Chlorophyll reacting to certain but not all light wavelength's (Red and Blue being the major ones) plus the distance from the light source. The amount of watts the the sun generates is NOT what grows plants. LED's can produce the same light wavelength's but much closer and with no obstructions. The question isn't about LED's power generation, it's how much power does it take for an LED to cover an area. Obviously a LED can't compare to pure Solar efficiency on a watt by watt basis but it doesn't need to.

Except none of that matters, Solar Irradiance has very little to do with actual photosynthesis. You are measuring Watt's as a pure energy source, that's useless in this case. Photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD's) are what's important, that's the amount of light wavelengths that the plant needs to absorb to power photosynthesis. Here is a definition from another source, I'll post the link at the bottom:

PPFD is a measure of photosynthetic active radiation, PAR for short. PAR is not a measure of anything itself but is more of a description. PAR light is all the visible wavelengths of light which cause photosynthesis, found within the 400-700 nanometer range. PPFD is a ‘spot’ measurement that tells you how many photons from the PAR range hit a specific area of your canopy over time. It is expressed as micro moles per square meter per second (μmol/m2/s). For this reason, PPFD is the most accurate measure of light power. First, unlike other measures, it considers the entire spectrum of light that plants see. PPFD also takes into account the amount of light that will actually reach the plant instead of focusing only on the point of origin. A light source can be very bright and powerful, but if it is too away from the plant, or obstructed in some way, the plant won’t be getting all the light it needs for photosynthesis. PPFD controls for this kind of inaccuracy.

With LED's you can place the plants much closer to the light source and control the color spectrum along with the obstructions 24/7. It allows you to grow indoors at an extremely efficient rate. Your formula has almost nothing to do with indoor farming.

https://www.freightfarms.com/blog/indoor-grow-lights#:~:text....

Here are some additional sources: https://archipel.uqam.ca/1619/1/1998_025_Gendron.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1066711/pdf/pln... https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paul_Hanson7/publicatio... https://www.horti-growlight.com/en-gb/par-ppf-ypf-ppfd-dli#:.... https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/...

Quick summary: PPFD measures the amount of light wavelengths that the plant captures that kicks off the chemical reaction of Chlorophyll. Red and Blue lights are the vast majority of wavelengths that interact with Chlorophyll. That's a major reason why the solar irradiance measure of pure Wattage is irrelevant.

Below ground has trade offs, it's easier to use gravity flow designs but you lose all natural sunlight. Most of the time rain catchment systems on roof top vertical farms or free standing green houses are easier to design. There are already a bunch of vertical farms in commercial operation. The Netherlands in particular is leading the science here but in the US a number of farms exist. Vertical farming uses around 90% less water and solar/wind/hydro power for LED's is extremely doable. You are wholly incorrect about the amount of work required and amount of resources. It does take smart design to work however.

Aquaponics and Hydroponics average 3-4x the growth rate and grow 24/7 (though you do need to provide lightless hours for proper fruiting). It's 100% viable and there are commercial operations right now.

Vertical farming is far less resource intensive, using LEDS powered by solar or wind and gravity flow designs. I posted this in another comment but here is very brief video talking about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5clOYWsNhhk

I have other resources should you wish and I ton of personal experience. I have 3 Hydroponic systems (1 off the shelf, 2 custom designed by me) and 2 Aquaponics systems. The custom ones took 3 months to recoup the costs of materials vs the cost of produce, though the liquid fertilizer is a cost and input that I don't love. I've switched most of my effort to Aquaponics (Aquaculture - raising fish, which provides a natural fertilizer), I have 1 microsetup growing herbs and microgreens that has been running for 1 year. Only inputs are water and fish food, I clean it 1 once every 3 months since the plants act as a natural filter to clean the water.

This is completely misinformed, there are tons of vertical Hydroponic and aquaponic farms already in production that are thriving at much lower resource costs. Solar panels powering LED's and gravity flow water make a massive difference. For example:

One is being built minutes from my house https://verticalharvestfarms.com/locations/westbrook-maine/

Also The Netherlands are leading the world at this type of farming, here is a short video about it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5clOYWsNhhk

Especially when you use Hydroponics and Aquaponics, which are MUCH more efficient than traditional farming. Fresh fish/seafood and produce minutes after harvest is are completely different and better class of food!

My Wife has long term Lyme and the cost for us aren't quite that much but close and can also confirm that insurance will cover very little of it.

My wife has long term Lyme and in fact very little is covered by insurance. Our experience has been that the majority of Dr's throw up their hands and say they don't know how to treat it so it's either not real or it must be something else causing it. Once you find a Dr to treat it insurance rarely covers much of it. All of this despite many many cases existing.

The components are the main upgrades, pickups are easy to change after the fact. Pickups, bridge, and tuners are the main things on electrics in my experience. PRS wrap around bridges or good quality floyd rose bridges for example. Locking tuners and a roller nut is another example. Depending on the sound you want active pickups or coil taps or stacked single coils.

Main three things I want to be better designed is better/easier tuning and tuning stability, quality and versatility of sound, and playability. Neck profile and construction is a another example. Set neck (Les Paul and PRS), bolt on (Tele and Strat), or Neck Through (Jackson, ibanez) all have different advantages.

To me the C/C++/Rust example fits pretty well, Leo's Broadcaster is completely different sounding and playing than a custom built strat or high end PRS. Humbucking pickups as just an example. The Broadcaster had terrible feedback issues at high volume for example and a modern guitar should never have that issue unless you intend for it to feedback. Broadcaster is rough design, few features, and easy to make mistakes on alot like C. Les Pauls and Strats add a ton of features from the Tele/Broadcaster and can be easier to play but can also are more complex in there setup/design like C++. Modern designs are even more complex (active eq/pickups, locking tuners and roller nuts, floyd rose bridges etc...) but just as powerful but setting them up is a steep learning curve at times just like Rust.

Oh for acoustic, I really like the Blueridge guitars and Seagull guitars. Seagull are made in Canada with pretty great materials and designs but much cheaper than most American made instruments.

I'm more of a high end custom guy for acoustics, in my experience you get what you pay for MUCH more on acoustics. If an electric plays well, you can make up a lot of sound from the amp (tube or modeling if you need variety), good pedals, and aftermarket pickups. Acoustics sound great when you play them or not. I always tell people to spend on the Acoustic and balance it out with electric.