skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Capacity factor is an energy 101 concept, and evaluating energy based on overnight capital costs plus capacity factor misses out on the an exceptional number of crucial factors: lifetime of capital, O&M, cost of capital, and these days, dispatchability and time of delivery.

The levelized cost of energy takes most of these into account (except dispatch), and shows that nuclear is >4x as expensive, when it gets built and not abandoned halfway through construction. This risk is significant for large projects, and why in 2008, utilities used lobbyists in state legislatures in Georgia and South Carolina to stick customers with the bill for failed construction projects, without which neither Vogtle nor VC Summer would have started. No sane investor would risk billions on new nuclear construction without placing the risk on others.

Real life deployments in free market systems like Texas' ERCOT shows that investors who put their own money on the line to generate electricity cheaply contrast heavily with regulated utilities which profit by rate-basing and therefor want electricity as expensive as possible. And when investors are putting their own money on the line to generate cheap electricity, they don't want to build nuclear or coal or hydro, they are massively investing in wind, solar, and battery storage.
How is that not just another name for customer support? They're both kinds of support for the customer, even if one has a more palatable name. In my experience, one is simply an alias for the other, as the sibling commenter notes, I have not seen those two roles split out.
By the time Twitter will live long enough as U.S. Steel right now it will highly likely be even cheaper. If even exist at all.
My favorite cat / bird interaction of all time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WANZBs8Za0Q
Either you are trolling or very confident on your ignorance and don't care about misrepresenting.
I wish regulation worked that way! Regulations change all the time - if not in law certainly in practice/interpretation.

That is what makes industries with heavy regulation such risky investments.
China is living proof we could do it- they are currently on track to build a _reactor a year_. We let all our nuclear talent age out and die.
Thanks for the story, I gifted a copy to an intern at work this year and I hope they enjoy it.
Maybe not the best example, although I still remember filters became huge around the same time the AI versions started emerging. Video transcripts are another example, or even text translation at this point. These are widely used forms of AI but it's not what most people are talking about when they talk about AI.
Incumbents reinforce their moats through labyrinthine regulation (and bribery?) and are smarter than their predecessors in adapting to newer technologies.
250 employees earning the average AR wage (542400 ARS/year) is around 360000 USD per year. You can pay 10 average AR workers for the wage of a single US minimum wage worker.
I've found it very hard to create different styles with SDXL. If you want photorealism, anime, sci-fi, or somewhere in between, it's amazing.

But I've been trying to get it to generate equivalent quality in other styles, e.g. watercolor, abstract painting etc. It doesn't seem to be easy - the quality drops a lot and it's harder to avoid weird results like people wearing enormous hats or distorted perspective.

Admittedly I haven't spent a huge amount of time on this because generation is just a bit too slow to be enjoyable on my machine. Has anyone else had success here?
I wonder if that is long enough to significantly impact LD structure.
I literally added a 1200 baud modem to my first computer purchase so that I could dial in to CompuServe. Living in the countryside it was an expensive long distance call just to connect and that cost limited my usage but I sure enjoyed it.
Also you can right-click a playlist and select "Exclude this from musical profiling" (translated from my native language). I did that for many older playlists I'm no longer into, and this seemed to cause a significant steer in weekly recommendations which have since turned to be much more in line with my current tastes.
There's a book I like called "Design Rules: The Power of Modularity"; it was written by some business professors in 2000 and is loosely about the industrial organization and the history of IBM's System/360 (the first "modular computer family") and more generally about how modularity enables innovation and growth.

They enumerate what they call "modular operators" which are basic ways a system can be changed:

* "splitting" a design into modules

* "substituting" one module design for another

* "augmenting" adding a new module to the system

* "excluding" a module from the system

* "inverting" to create new design rules

* "porting" a module to another system

It doesn't matter here whether the modules are functions, computer programs, hardware components, business units, 2 pizza teams, or companies in an industry (Intel, AMD, RAM manufacturers...).

Modularity is a core part of the Unix philosophy. Unix itself is an operating system and involves some particular concepts (pipes, files, processes).

It seems obvious that the concepts for an operating system (pipes, files) will be less relevant in a different domain (say, web programming).

While I agree that maybe the Unix abstractions aren't appropriate for new problems in different domains, I think some parts of the Unix philosophy (i.e. modularity, minimalism, and compositionality) still deserve consideration.
in some states, isn't this against the law?

like texas and california diametrically opposed (I think)

texas: we own you

california: you can start a startup in your garage while working for someone else
I moved ~10 domains from namecheap to porkbun awhile back, since they were already cheaper.
Why is it so tall? Rainier Square in Seattle is 58 stories and only 260m. Columbia Tower is 76 stories and 284m.

Also according to Wikipedia the Comcast Center is only 297m and is the 31st tallest building in the USA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comcast_Center

EDIT: I see that Comcast Center and Comcast Technology Center are 2 different buildings. Not confusing at all... guess that's typical for Comcast. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comcast_Technology_Center

Also looking at it, those top floors are... well tiny as fuck.
Exactly. LLMs are useful out of the box—and that enables tons of use-cases that just weren't economical (or even possible) with older models.
[Too late to edit, replying to myself...]

That's supposed to be 2**(4/12) and 2**(7/12) above. I forgot to escape the asterisks. (It's exponentiation, not multiplication.)
> U.S. Steel was once the largest company in the world.

You're talking about practically ancient history. "In 1902, its first full year of operation, U.S. Steel made 67 percent of all the steel produced in the United States. About 100 years later, as of 2001, it produced only 8 percent more than it did in 1902, and its shipments accounted for only about 8 percent of domestic consumption." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Steel

The federal government did try to break up U.S. Steel... in 1911.
Opportunity cost in locations solar isn't so efficient.

Nuclear is a good "filler" for environments that aren't conducive to other renewables.
Hm; maybe you are right in that I am conflating 'copyright' and 'the ability to commercialize'. So to follow up, I'm under the impression that the copyright of a character enables companies to create and sell licenses to third parties to use the likeness of the character under terms limited by the license, and that any commercial usage outside of that paradigm is a copyright violation.

EG. it's 1998 and the Pokemon Company licenses MadCatz (defunct) to create Pokemon themed N64 controllers. Such a license is limited to N64 controllers; let's say under the terms of the license, MadCatz can't turn around and make a Pokemon themed bag in the style of ugh, Rat Fink. MadCatz can't make N64 controllers, and the Pokemon Company knows this, and really doesn't want them botching up their brand with horrific art, too. Copyright protects brand.

Now legally speaking, I can put a depiction of pikachu on a powerpoint slide in a school report and call it 'fair use'. But the second I sell that art on a bag (regardless of whether I put the words Pokemon on it), I've violated copyright laws, because the purchaser of my bag has deprived our poor Pokemon company of potential income. Womp-womp. Dumb as it is for Nintendo to come after me (as they go after the makers of Pokemon rom hacks, et al), it makes some sense, depending on how I scale up.

Fast forward to 2026 and now we have GPT-8 (flip it sideways for infinity, as we have reached the Singularity by this time). Pokemon is old as the hills and is celebrating its 30th anniversary (Jesus!). I use an AI with the prompt "fat yellow thunder mouse", and it generates a "pikachu but better", uncannily like the iconic character (because it's the only yellow thunder mouse anyone ever draws) but cute in all the ways that our AI knows how to get to humans, and I decide to coin it in an NFT and put it up for sale. Let's say the Pokemon Company is particularly litigious in its old age and is a veritable Disney. Or hell, let's suppose Disney bought the Pokemon Company (and now Misty is a Disney princess, just like Leia).

Given that: I own the NFT (in the sense of your software library example), no-one owns the art (AI-generated), Pokemon owns the brand and the concept of a Pikachu, and this particular depiction is recognized to be pikachu "but kinda better", we live in one of these worlds:

1. Disney is owed money from the proceeds, and can request cease of production / legal remedy
2. It is not owed anything, as the art itself was generated from an AI.

Which makes more sense?
This. People keep saying how the Fediverse is awesome and different. But everytime I go to sign up for Mastodon, I'm greeted with culture war rage bait and I decide against joining.
Fusion is a waste of money, it's hype is based on lies/mistruths and it's not going to work in time to address climate change.

In particular, they constantly conflate different definitions of energy. There's energy in/energy out, there's laser energy in/energy out (lasers currently being 0.5% efficient, so it's a lie of 2 orders of magnitude), there's energy in/out per pellet versus including warmup time, etc.

Even if fusion is possible within two decades, it might be prohibitively expensive to build for another decade or two, and we'd need to build a first commercial reactor before we can properly scale it, so I don't see fusion being possible before 2050.

So I'd rather that money be sent straight to fission plants, since we know they'll actually work on time.
There are absolutely states where if the officer says you are impaired, you are going to jail. Even if you blow 0.00. Will you be convicted? Probably not but you’ll still get to deal with court costs and paying a few grand to a lawyer. Oh and you get to explain an arrest, that can never be expunged, for the rest of your life.
Don’t worry, we won’t for whatever reason.
Umm, I’m pretty sure all of them are in much better shape than India’s cities. I mean, skid row in LA, arguably one of the worst places in a U.S. city, isn’t even half as bad in terms of decrepitness and lack of infrastructure as Dharavi in Mumbai. The latter of which is the second largest slum in the world, behind only Brazil’s favelas.

But I don’t get this attitude. No one is “telling” India what to do. It’s a news article from a global publication that does similar stuff for cities and countries all over the world.

For example, I bet you will find an order of magnitude more articles on the Economist about the US’s failing infrastructure or homelessness problem etc.

Frankly, it’s just a sign of deep insecurity that whenever anyone posts something about India there will be people popping up with whataboutism and defensiveness.
Hey, don’t let facts get in the way of a good narrative.
If I were in your shoes, I would ask for my money back and then go to a college that respects me. It would be a huge hassle I am sure, but security, privacy, and freedom are worth it.
The common sentiment around AI in the 90s and early 2000s was that it didn't work; it had its hype, it had its heyday, but it seemed like a dead-end for the most part. The Perceptron was merely a linear function approximator. And the Multi-layer Perceptron was a little more capable, but the many orders of magnitude it would have to scale up in order to be convincing just wasn't feasible back then (it finally was in the 2010s).

Simple statistical models that aren't "AI" so much as just generic ML were and are quite useful: like recommendation and newsfeed engines ("the Algorithm" as we call it so often today). Love 'em or hate 'em, they can be quite good at predicting interest/engagement.

The resurgence in deep learning in the 2010s has shown us new magic tricks, but they're still just that: parlor tricks. At least they're more convincing tricks than what we had 40 years ago!

That's what ultimately depresses me about AI. It's still just a parlor trick. We haven't actually taught computers to think, to reason, to be innovative. Deep learning is definitely having its day, but I suppose this too will pass unless we can unlock certain ways to make AI reliable and responsible. Or... to just start understanding it in general.
That's okay since right to repair doesn't really exist. The owner of the product would just sue you for breech of licensing. er...
Ditto - and the same with the claims of solar and wind companies because of - [Goodhart's Law - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law

- "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure"

But even if we take that view, how many deaths would nuclear have to have caused to break even with fossil fuels? https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-p... puts nuclear at 0.03 and hydropower at 1.3. So it is ~50 times less than hydro. That's a lot of wiggle room!
That's only if you opt-in to the Brave ads.
Because exploits that can break out via ads are not usually worth burning on randos?
This time it's different, though. In the age of computing, nobody will be able to step up to IBM — they control the entire industry. This is only going to be more true now that they have consolidated their control over the consumer computer market with the Personal Computer.
And the security problems of malicious ads slipping through at higher rates aren’t an issue?
I had a day of interviews once, and I remember the person who interviewed me during lunchtime. Wvery time I would get a fork near my mouth I would have to put it down and answer a question.

I remember dumping a full lunch in the trash can as we walked out towards a conference room for the next interviewer I would meet...
By this logic, we should go back to manual deploys since CD lets... aghast... computers deploy our most important software to prod
I think that's kind of the point. Us steel had a 120 year run without being toppled. This isn't exactly a new phenomenon.

It's hard to guess where Apple or Google will be in 100 years
The terminology is a bit of a mess (grounding vs bonding vs earthing, etc), but it mostly boils down to a few ideas:

1. Connect exposed or potentially inadvertently energized conductive parts to each other.

2. Connect potentially energized inadvertently conductive parts to something such that, if they are inadvertently energized (a live wire touches them by accident), the power will shut off.

3. Connect conductive things to the actual ground to allow lightning currents to dissipate somewhat safely, to reduce danger if you stand with your feet on the actual ground and your hand on something metal, etc.

#1 and #2 are unaffected by ice. #3 is, but if the ice is not conductive, then the degree to which harmful currents can conduct through it is reduced too.

As an aside:

#2 is complicated. In the US at least, it’s usually done by “solidly grounding” something. In a split phase system (houses) or a wye system (most commercial installations), this is the “neutral”, and it’s connected to “ground” at the supply. The neutral is (IMO) an evil current-carrying wire that happens to be at zero-ish volts to ground when everything is working right and can hide plenty of awful wiring errors. There are other systems (delta) where the neutral wire doesn’t exist as such but is still solidly grounded.

Somewhere near the opposite end of the spectrum are systems like Swedish Neutral’s “ground fault neutralizer”, where there are three current-carrying wires and the system is engineered so that any one of them can contact ground and conduct almost no current to ground as a result, but the monitoring equipment will nonetheless notice and can shut things down safely.

A household 120V hot+neutral system with a GFCI/RCD is somewhere in between.

#3 is a big deal in some interesting cases. Electric stations and similar very high voltage installations care about things like “step potential” — without sufficiently careful grounding, personnel can get zapped if they are standing near a fault with their feet apart, even if they’re only touching the ground. If you are anywhere near a downed power line and you are not in a vehicle, either hop on one foot or shuffle your feet until you are far away — do not walk normally. If you are in a vehicle and can’t stay in safely (e.g. it’s on fire), jump out so you don’t touch the ground until you are completely clear of the vehicle. Then hop or shuffle as above.
I disagree with this 100%, the only people using numbers to mode future carbon-free grids are ending up on massive amounts of solar, wind, and storage, with a tiny bit of nuclear. But that nuclear is so difficult to build that the models that end up adding nuclear also have unrealistic costs and deployment timelines associated with it.

We have ~100 reactors in the US, nearly all are close to end of life. We would need to start building ~100 reactors today in order to keep the same amount of nuclear in the future. We have one, just one, nearing completion, and no more that have any chance of getting funded and starting construction within a few years. We are going to go through a long period with far less nuclear than we have today, if we ever get to a period with more nuclear than today. I doubt we ever will.

If you want numbers, check out Christopher Clack's modeling. It is by far the most detailed, and the most complete, and the most innovative.

But to say that nuclear advocates run the numbers is just false. They can't even run the numbers on their own construction plans, much less the numbers on the system level of what it would take to keep nuclear a significant part of our grid. Nuclear advocates are the least numerate folks in the energy business, again and again, since the big burst of reactors in the 70s.
Damn i thought this was Compuware. Loved the Compuware Corvette C5-R
This is the one. We use this at Akkio so that Engineering doesn’t need to be involved in website changes that are more just marketing and branding. Lets us maximize engineering time on the actual product.
Actually every extension on AMO must go through manual inspection to push as auto update. You may push new version to market without manual inspection. But it won't auto update to users' computers until then.

So human review really isn't the real difference on firefox's side. Because it is required since day one
Safeway is not safe for your wallet
Ruining people’s lives over weed is arguably immoral and not justice. I see no connection between that and penalties for drunk driving, which are necessary.

The point is that while a person should lose their driving privileges for driving drunk, we should take seriously the implications of the typical punishment given our car dependent society, and the lack of public transit options in most places that aren’t big city centers.

The comment was a reaction to the flippant “just get a bike”, which is clearly not sufficient in many cases. Driving drunk is stupid, dangerous, and should involve serious penalties. We should not ruin people’s lives over it.
This is very similar to Ben Thompson's The End of the Beginning article: https://stratechery.com/2020/the-end-of-the-beginning/

What I took from this article is that you can never beat incumbents by trying to offer a better version of their product. They already have immense institutionalized knowledge and economies of scale. You can only beat them by offering a different product that meets their needs better. Think Walmart vs Amazon. Online shopping is actually a completely different product.

An example today is the iPhone. There are a ton of competitors trying to offer a better version of the same thing, but iPhone share is only growing in the US. Is it possible to offer a product that better suits its niche of mobile general purpose computing? Maybe! But technology today is so capital and knowledge intensive that the kind of organization that can try is probably already about Apple-sized (Vision Pro?).
Charlottesville might have thoughts on this
I'm looking forward to using it on safari
cafeteria is a safe answer there.

(sort of like: "my one weakness is I work TOO hard!")
I hate this sentiment. We might learn that human thought and reasoning are parlor tricks too once we understand them better. Anything we start to understand loses its mystery
Chaebols
Do you have a source for this? I always thought they long ago stopped manual inspections for most extensions.
This attitude is even worse in an article that points to an Indian city that has made great progress and says it can make even more progress if given more autonomy, and then points to quotes about the decrepit ness of a Chinese and an American city which have improved drastically showing a positive path for Indian cities as well.
I have the feeling in the very near future a controlling amount of Twitters debt could be purchased for 7B
How interesting! I wonder what happened behind the scene to require this. Companies in spaces like that usually require specific merchant banks that are willing to deal with "high risk" (or so seemed to be the search term). I wonder if this had advantages in bank selection or how it looked to the banks? Or perhaps a technical limitation?
I can’t quite reconcile this article with what I’ve seen before like this below…the methodology in the OP seems pretty questionable, so I trust this other article more.

https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/fortune-500-firms-1955-v-2016...
TIL it can be installed into Thunderbird [1], awesome. Is this thanks to the MV3?

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/ublock-origin...
You'd buy a vacuum cleaner as a gift for a friend? I find that incredibly hard to believe but if it's true, it's very strange behaviour.
I was hoping that the blog post would actually spell out examples of problems. Is it just me or have there been a lot of shorter blog posts on HN lately that are really no more than an introduction section rather than an actual full article?
"An association with" does not indicate that a factor necessarily "drives" the outcome. It might just be associated with it but not caused by it.

What a terrible PR release written by a non-scientist ("News Content Manager") for clicks and hype and zero critical thinking. The worst part is, they didn't even include a link to the full study in the press release.
That's a shitty thing to assume. For all you know they treated their website like a diary and just write for the sake of expressing themselves. It's not like the author posted it here seeing as they are dead.
> Umm, I’m pretty sure all of them are in much better shape than India’s cities.

Umm, no.