skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Okay, so let's dig in:

1: Electricity is roughly 25% of a country energy expense. If we want to fight climate drift, electricity should become 80% of the total energy expense at the very least. That mean multiplying the number of power plants by 3.5 roughly, if we want to keep the same level of comfort (and by two if we accept to loose 40% of our GDP).

2: here are the cost of a 100% renewable mix:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030626191...

The land usage cost is ignored, but as 80% of the agricultural surface in the EU is used by animal or for animal feed, let's say we all divide our consumption by 7 (eat meat once a week), and the fred agricultural land can be used for biomass and solar.

The need in rare earth and how much of the worldwide production europe would take in this scenario isn't sustainable, but let's believe in an infinite earth with infinite ressources, so the extraction rate isn't an issue and is done solely with renewable. Europe still need more than 40% of the world future production.

3. So now, using the information you got with 1/, in a scenario with merely doubling the electricity output and reducing GDP by 40%, expand the data on 2/ (still without nuclear plant).

Draw your own conclusions, look at the data yourself, i only did order of magnitude calculations and it seems obvious to me. If one of my point is wrong, please explain why.

Okay, now in the price category: EDF is forced by France to sell its electricity to its competitor at a low price, and basically give it for free for some institution. Also, it is forced to cover the cost of an industrial failure it did neither start nor want, and to bear the cost of political choice (fessenhein closure). Despite that, i'm pretty sure electricity is cheaper in France than in most other European countries with no access with cheap hydro. Oh, and EDF bear the full cost of future nuclear plant decommission, so the "ït will cost more in the future" shit is wrong and already accounted for.
> I read in a history book that human beings managed to coordinate entire empires that stretched across continents with out digital electronics.

You asked specifically for little leagues. The across continents coordination is done by a.) delegating rulership to local warlords b.) keeping military power strong enough to keep those you those in check. It had massive limitation in terms of what it could achieve and has zero to do with organizing of competitions for kids.

Plus, the central power would not bother to micromanage little teams. It is our culture that finds little leagues important, not theirs.
There are many videos of Jean-Marc Jancovici on this subject. Some of them are in English. It gives documented pragmatic analysis. One conclusion is clear:
Current nuclear plants shall be preserved to smooth the energetic transition (fossil free). What has been done in Germany was not wise.

It is less obvious whether we shall build new nuclear plants or focus on new energy sources. In France, we struggle to recover our aptitude to build new plants.
Nuclear is expensive in the short term and remarkably cheap in the long run.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbeJIwF1pVY

That said the more intermittent ambient energy is on the grid the more difficult it is for nuclear to operate 24/7, which makes it take longer for nuclear to go from expensive to cheap.
I mean the same could be said for the 'Live' brand
> The infrastructure to produce food is pretty vital, but I think it's also mostly market-driven and works well.

You're talking about on of the most subsidised matkets on Earth. It's hardly market-driven.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_opium_in_China
> I think this is just

Whatever it might "just" be, these are the rights they claim. If it was "just" something benign, they could claim those rights. That's what you make legal write those documents for (and if you don't have one to write those documents, you shouldn't be making them at all).

The fact that they have claimed them and still have them means they feel like they might use those rights. That makes it evil.
The logical standard are SI prefixes. Do you proprose that a milligram should become 1/1024th of a gram instead?
The racist covenant is a different situation as it is not only unenforceable, it is illegal for the owner to comply with it.

It is not illegal for the employee to adhere to the non-compete agreement.
It is never about how much money you have, rather what situation you are in, what you are expecting and what others around you have.
I'm not sure about SIMD. It's possible to recover (more likely, create by loop unrolling) parallelism that can be turned into SIMD code on the LLVM level. That's what LLVM already does.
A recent development not mentioned in this article is Wi-Fi Halow/802.11ah, this is a new standard using the 900MHz ISM band. Advantages of this are better signal penetration/range for the same output power (or lower output power for the same range).

Compared to 2.4/5G wifi Halow uses narrower bandwidths so has lower data rates but is still much higher than BLE. BLE can do up to ~2MBit with a 2MHz BW, 802.11ah can do up to ~8MBit with a 2MHz BW but can go up to 16MHz BW. Additionally 802.11ah supports MIMO, so it can also scale the bandwidth up with more antennas.

There are some other new fun features in 802.11ah namely TWT (target wake time) which is a powersaving method that solves a lot of the problems the article mentioned with powersaving in wifi.
> Elizabethan preachers railed against a fuel they believed to be, literally, the Devil’s excrement.

1. So it seems, 500 years later, as we struggling with all the issues this resource has caused and still causing they were not wrong...

> For too many environmentalists concerned with global warming, nuclear energy is today’s Devil’s excrement

Read (1)

---
It is only a question who will suffer along the lines, after we are long gone from the existence.
The domain is created to reach the maximum number of allowed characters
Nope. They file bankruptcy. And the bill is left on the table. Only profits (divident) go to investors. If a company becomes insolvable the investors are shielded. Similar to when a company operated against the law: profits were taken by investors, now they can sink the shop when the law suits start.

> If it was a public utility it would be tax payers. That would be socializing losses.

No-one is arguing against that! In both cases the tax payers pay. Just in the privatized case the investors got the profits out year after year, and now threaten to sink the shop in order to get bailed out: that's what sets privatization apart from operating as a public company.
Unfortunately NLopt cannot be included into Gradient-Free-Optimizers. But i would like to implement multiple algorithms that are also preset in NLopt.

I think it will help my understanding of optimization algorithms if i implement them myself. I currently have my eyes on the Downhill-simplex, Direct and Powell's Method. But they are quite different from what i have already implemented, so this could take some time.
Yes, but also includes a person born abroad to parents who are United States citizens.
The article doesn’t even discuss the annual deaths from coal mining accidents, specially in China.
I'm using this monitor, and it has replaced a dual-screen FHD setup. The amount of vertical resolution is fantastic.
Not a single mention of OPNsense... I recommend people to use it instead of pfSense.
OpenJDK was ported to musl libc[1], so I guess Cosmopolitan should be possible, musl is a lot smaller than glibc. I'd also like to see how well RISC-V is supported by Cosmpolitan.

[1] https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/386
This transition can _never_ be finished. There is no reality in which, in 2025, or 2030, or 2040, Germany is running 100% on renewables. Let's have a quick look at the german energy mix:

https://www.electricitymap.org/zone/DE

As I write this:

* Germany has 68GW of wind capacity. Only 3GW are currently producing, because there's no wind.

* Solar is doing just as bad, with 9.11GW active out of 53GW

* Even worse, in the last 24 hours, wind has basically been at 5% capacity the entire time. Solar picked up quite a bit, but the base production is guaranteed by coal plants. This gets immensely worse at night where this rises to over half of their energy output

* Each kWh has cost the world the emission of 400g of CO2.

* Even in the best possible conditions, their green mix still ejects 210g of carbon per kWh.

The green energy ayatollahs, with their there-is-no-alternative policy are making things worse by refusing a temporary, controlled, safe source of energy. Is nuclear ideal ? No. Should it be a temporary (~100 years or so) source of energy while we transition to better options ? Yes. Is it the best solution that we have to fight climate change as it stands ? Absolutely.

And yes, they are building new coal plants to make up for their decisions. Datteln 4 just started up last year.
Getting banned for modifying the game process seems very commonplace and likely? It'll be a part of any anti-cheat system, it's basically table stakes.
Indeed.

DEC, a shame.-

... and Sun! They -were- high end workstations in the 90's.-

(There are several interesting features out there, about Sun ...)

Hey, at least we are still using the result of their labors and innovation, in a sense, so, there's that :)
These metrics don't matter. Almost every library you care to pull for a popular (read: widely used and written) language will be trash. Yes, even if you pay for it. Even if it was a "reputable" company making it.
First I rely in good part on HN proven ability to police bad behaviour. On top of that, by the very nature of the service and to extract good content, I will be focused on analysing the type of content posted. I will have a greater incentive to detect dishonnest, nefarious behavior.

I think light-astroturfing always happen, here less than elsewhereon the web, probably because it gets called out quickly by HN readers.
And one of the key to having it under control is to bring it out in the open.
I'm going to make the valid assumption that someone, at some point, was assigned to fix this. The issue here, IMHO, is why they didn't. It comes down to how complicated it was to fix this from the organizational perspective, and not from the technical perspective. I'll explain.

First, a disclaimer: I have no idea how much Rockstar employees are paid, nor how their workdays look like. I don't know what their team sizes are, where they worked before, or who manages who and in what fashion. I actually don't know anything about the Rockstar engineering organization at all.

I am also not a GTA player (or, more accurately, haven't been since San Andreas came out many moons ago). This is my perspective as someone who has worked for various organizations in his life ( SWE-centered ones but also other, more "traditional" ones too).

We're all familiar with technical debt - it's a well established concept by now. Reducing it is part of the normal workload for well-functioning organizations, and (good) tech leads think about it often.

What isn't talked about as often is the "organizational" debt. Some things are "verboten" - you don't touch them, you don't talk about them, and you run like hell if you're ever assigned to deal with them.

Every large enough company has (at least) one of those. It might be a critical service written in a language nobody in the team knows anymore. Maybe it's a central piece of infra that somebody wrote and then left, and it's seen patch after patch ever since. These are things that end your career at the company if the BLAME points to you after you attempted to fix them.

I have a gut feeling - not based on anything concrete, as I mentioned - that the loading part for GTA Online might be one of those things. If someone breaks the process that loads the game - that's a big deal. No one would be able to play. Money would be lost, and business-folk will come knocking.

So sure, there might be some mitigations in place - if some part fails to load they allow the game to load anyways, and then attempt to fix it mid-fly. It's not black and white. But it feels like one of those things, and so people might have just been running like hell from it for years and years. Teams change. Projects change hands. People leave, more people join. It's life in the industry.

I would be REALLY interested in learning how software orgs deal with these types of behemoths in their projects. I have yet to find someone who knows how to - methodically and repetitively - break these apart when they appear.
> Seasonal variations in cold climates can be handled better by trash burning facilities. Yeah, recycle/reuse first, but eventually you'll need to get rid of a lot of non-recyclable mixed waste regardless.

Do you have any numbers or sources to provide for this claim?

> If we have enough renewable hydrogen production plants to make all the hydrogen we need for ships, planes, steel production, farming and fertilizers, we'll have all the energy regulation and storage capability we'll ever need.

So your argument is predicated on a future breakthrough in hydrogen production and storage that is so impressive it solves both transportation problems and renewable energy intermittancy? And you argue this is better than using a proven source of baseline energy today?
I generally assume code is broken from the start now, but I don't think that this is because average code is getting worse. I think it's because there are more "solutions" to problems online (also, I'm more critical than I was a decade ago).

In the past, I had to write almost everything from scratch, and that meant I'd have worse code than what is open-sourced nowadays for the time period that I was implementing (and possibly longer if the problem is gnarly).

Nowadays, I can do a search on GitHub and find something that appears to solve my problem, but when I use it it'll turn out the author was solving a slightly different problem than mine and so his solution only partially solves my problem or doesn't handle certain edge-cases/bugs that will be a problem for me.

That doesn't mean that the code is worse. I am just using something that was created to solve another person's problem and expecting it to solve my own problems with no extra work.

Basically, you can still choose to implement everything from scratch if you want to. In these situations you should make sure to learn from the people that came before you, by reading other people's code first and spending time thinking about your design/implementation.

But if you want to use other people's code off-the-shelf to implement something faster, you can't just assume that because their solution solved their problem without running into edge-cases, that it'll do the same for yours. You have to be responsible for every line of code that you integrate with, and should assume that is not guaranteed to work for your problem/data.

---

What is an issue and wasn't before, are problems that occur due to a particular combination of packages and incompatabilities. These problems are difficult because they can require impossible levels of co-ordination to fix upstream. I think in many situations we should rewrite things to be more monolithic than they are.
Let's call them "code technicians" instead of engineers, ok? (that's a euphemism for "code monkeys")
That's more or less what they are doing. Most of the reactors that have been shut down were built in the 1970s when safety standards weren't as strict as they are today. https://cnpp.iaea.org/countryprofiles/Germany/Germany.htm That is, the reactors were over 40 years old and were reaching their end-of-life dates anyway. Upgrading them to conform to modern safety standards isn't cost-effective.

Essentially, this is what the nuclear phaseout entails; old plants are decommissioned and governments refrain from subsidizing the construction of new ones.
"As a result of the Chernobyl reactor accident, certain species of mushrooms and wild game are still highly contaminated with caesium-137 in some areas of Germany." https://www.bfs.de/EN/topics/ion/environment/foodstuffs/mush..., from the Federal Office for Radiation Protection.
In my experience yes. Average code is much, much worse than it used to be. Regardless of the origin. Then again, there's also much more of it. It could be argued to be a mixed blessing.
Lithium for energy storage is not the only option. Pumped water already has been a thing for decades. Additionally other avenues are being explored like [1] pumped air and [2] lifting concrete weights.

[1] https://www.planete-energies.com/en/medias/close/what-compre...

[2] https://profittrends.com/energy-investing/renewable-energy/s...
I think this is the reason politicians all around the world have been so ill-equipped to deal with Covid - they are used to their decisions having 10 / 20 year repercussions, by which time they're well out of the blame-zone.
I've negotiated it from my contract before - it was a CTO role for a fashion e-commerce app. I was in the position to make use of their R&D costs and ran off with the idea.

I just brought up that the wording is too broad, and signing that would prevent me from taking any job related to e-commerce as well. So they narrowed it down to apps that utilize (fashion && e-commerce && social networking).

"any business in competition with the Company's business" is way too broad so you have to talk that through.

I also had another contract, where they were selling our expertise to the client and the client could have cut through the company and hired me directly at a quarter of the cost. It had similarly vague wording, like "not allowed to do business with any clients engaged by Company".

So I renegotiated that to "not allowed to business with Client X" because "clients engaged by Company" could mean some other client I've never met.
But it is, or was, or cooperative, what investors are you talking about? Stop spreading disinformation for heavens sake.
Try pricing 1070 or 1080. You know, 5 year old GPUs.
> It’s just kids playing ball, I don’t understand the high stakes. We used to just play pick up games in the park and that was fun too. No birth certificate required! Why is little league so serious?

Dont be facetious. It is competitive league for little kids. It is not just kids playing sport for fun, as you said you need no organization for that. But, if what you want is competitions, coaches and performance, then you need an organized league.

It is different thing for kids/parents/families that are into that different competitive thing. Its existence is not preventing you to play ball with your own kids and their friends in park.
i always thought it was _Groucho_ Marx who said that line about fools. Goes to show what I know about the Marx brothers, I guess.
Yes, you are right, but part of the reason that nuclear power is so costly and we don't have a good solution to handle wastes is that we didn't have much scientific and engineering progress in that are for a very long time. Nobody wanted to work on this as such people were treated by academia, media and eco organizations like Holocaust deniers.

That plutonium is that dangerous since it emits energy that probably could be used with the right tech.
> checking what percentage of students by race pass the test, win the lottery, and are admitted. If there are unexplainable discrepancies between those steps, that would be good evidence of racism

Yes, I agree that this would be evidence of racism. But you can't turn the argument around. The lack of any discrepancies does not mean that black or hispanic students aren't at a disadvantage, because the disadvantage might be something that lead to the worse test results in the first place.
I am probably putting a huge subjective quality on this, but I think computer science departments divided into two: ones who did serious work in lisp, and all the others, who had a functioning lisp compiler and nobody willing to teach it seriously.

York, where I studied in 79-82 had just had Wirth in residence on a sabbatical, was totally committed to pascal, was backing one of the strawmen languages for the ADA selection committee, and had a hard core of committed Fortran, C and like block structured language people on staff.

Nobody was using lisp. The effect on me was strong. Other people I know from the same time period but other universities with a different outlook on teaching have totally different perspectives on the nature of programming languages and programming in general.
"struggle to make the shift away from fossil fuel AND nuclear (...) have to buy power from France (...) are able to sustain a large portion of our economy on renewables TODAY."

Let's say 40% of Germany's electricity consumption comes from renewables and 60% from the other sources. If I cut the other sources, will renewables still be able to provide their 40% shares? The answer is no, because people and the economy need a stable electricity. Providing Watts at random times is absolutely not the same value as providing them consistently in a predictable manner

When you say "sustain a large portion of our economy on renewables TODAY" you're missing "with the unavoidable baseload provided by non intermittent sources"
"Effective fusion" will always be that perpetual "20 years away" we've been hearing about for the last 60 years.

Nuclear's "large risks" are considerably more mitigatable with the new generation IV reactors. They fail cold/safe, use far less fissile material, in some of the models can consume the waste from other facilities, and in other cases, the waste they generate remains radioactive for less time.

Hydro has significant and lasting impact on ecosystems downstream from wherever they're damming up, to the detriment of biodiversity, fish species, watersheds, etc.

Solar is great, when the sun is shining, though, you know, we're running out of sand, and they take up a ton of land. (Though I do think a bigger push for more rooftop makes a lot of sense, and have a system on my house.)

And wind also takes up an insane amount of space, is fairly limited in terms of where it can be utilized, kills birds by the truckload (though apparently making one blade a different color can solve for that), and the blades themselves are impossible to properly dispose of or recycle. (Not actually impossible, just impossible in the way that our capacity is super limited, it's super difficult, and no one wants 120 ft aged out fiberglass paperweights which are super difficult to cut.)

My point is while it's easy to suggest the hydro/solar/wind triumvirate as a stand-in replacement for nuclear, we're _still_ grappling with those technologies' significant shortcomings, as you can witness by watching Germany transition away from nuclear and more on to... wait for it... NG, because they can't consistently meet demand or manage peaker events with renewables and decommed way too much capacity with nuclear.

A single waste site the size of two football fields is enough to store ALL waste generated by Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station: the largest nuke in the US, which has a capacity of 3,930MW -- enough to serve more than 4 million people. That's a hell of an efficient means of generating carbon free power, with very little footprint. (Worth noting that PV needs a large on-site reservoir for cooling since it's in a desert.) Still, compared to the largest solar farm in the US, Solar Star, which clocks in at 579MW from a system spread out over 3,200 acres (142 football fields), it's a decent compromise.

My point here is that instead of imagining nuclear as a point-in-time from tech decades ago and comparing it to new and current solar/wind tech, exploring nuclear's newer options could be huge if we could get out of our own way, and with limited risk.
I am the maintainer of FluffOS, (www.fluffos.info), a mud game engine.
MUD is my entry point to programming and I thought I can continue work on making MudOS better.

If anyone would like to get in touch, please join Gitter.im/fluffos