- I get that Chernobyl is near the border of two countries at war, but why the everloving hell is anyone targeting anything within miles of the exclusion zone? Are there any military units anywhere near there, or is it intentionally being targeted as an oblique dirty-bomb threat?
- Is launching an ffmpeg process so heavyweight that there's a reason to avoid it? If anything, it feels like it would trivialize parallelism, which is probably a feature, not a bug, if you have a bunch of videos to go through.
- >99.999% of the power put into compute turns into heat, so you're going to need to reject 8 MW of power into space with pure radiation. The ISS EATCS radiators reject 0.07 MW of power in 85 sq. m, so you're talking about 9700 sq. m of radiators, or bigger than a football field/pitch.
- You're breezing past the labor cost quite deftly. I'm reasonably sure that developing the Voyager probes required a few more people and hours than your average microservice.
- Am I having a stroke? Reading the title makes my head hurt.
- It does, but every time you click on a new option it's a new URL. So if you poke around a bit, you may have generated dozens of entries in the history.
- Feels like server developers should include turnkey configurations where you just give maybe a year/quarter and compatibility target (secure, medium, loose).
Needing to cha-cha your salsas, 128 to the 256 to the 1305...picking SSL ciphers is the biggest cargo-cult thing ever. I have no clue what I am doing.
- From my time working at a Fortune 100 company, if I ever mentioned pushing even small patches to libraries we effing used, I'd just be met "try to focus on your tickets". Their OSS library and policies were also super byzantine, seemingly needing review of everything you'd release, but the few times I tried to do it the official way, I just never heard anything back from the black-hole mailing list you were supposed to contact.
Yes, I've also worked on OpenStack components at a university, and there I see Red Hat or IBM employees pushing up loads of changes. I don't know if I've ever seen a Walmart, UnitedHealth, Chase Bank, or Exxon Mobil (to pick some of the largest companies) email address push changes.
- "Your" behavior??? The second you try to put this on individuals, you lose the plot and it turns into another "personal carbon footprint" scam like what BP pulled in 2004[1]. The only way out of this is public policy and international cooperation.
I don't know what the most common sources of microplastic particles are, but the messaging needs to be such that people know we aren't getting rid of all plastics, just the stupid ones that are most responsible for potentially harming us. I think straws were banned because there was a video of a plastic straw stuck in sea turtle's nose, not because they're one of the top sources.
[1]: https://mashable.com/feature/carbon-footprint-pr-campaign-sh...
- Matching additive colors (RGB) to subtractive (CMYK, though even in mixed paints there are dozens of tints) feels fraught with peril.
- When OpenAPI opened the polymorphism door with 'oneOf' and the like, it seems like it turned into a shitty language written in YAML rather than being a good concise way to communicate API design.
Former company enforced OpenAPI specs to be able to publish any API endpoint, devs just wanted to push code, so they made vague shit specs because it's pulling teeth to do it the right way (didn't help that the spec enforcer couldn't fully read YAML documents with references, so copypasta was rampant)...
I guess there's the endless cycle of 1) a format is created, 2) the format evolves to do more, 3) winds up being overbearing, 4) a new format is created...
- Fluoride doesn't bio-accumulate like PFAS do, which has a strong affinity for proteins and fats in organisms. Constantly drinking water with 0.5-1 ppm fluoride may cause minor side effects like mild dental fluorosis, but you'll excrete almost all the excess as it's very water soluble. Drink water with any PFAS, and your body will strongly hold on to it all.
- The Materials Science Gameplay Loop:
1. Invent fantastic new material that does a heretofore novel reaction or one with improved performance (chemical, photovoltaic, etc.)
2. Do #1 without lead, cadmium, mercury, or arsenic.
SociallyAwesomeAwkwardPenguinMeme("Turns PFAS to fluoride", "Contains Cadmium")
- In the web sphere, I recall Amazon having done something like this in the very early days when there was a sidebar with categories that you could kinda drill into. Mouseover one, and there was an invisible triangle off to the right that if you kept inside of, it wouldn't switch the current category.
https://bjk5.com/post/44698559168/breaking-down-amazons-mega...
- I guess my major question would be: does the training data include anything from 2025 which may have included information about the IMO 2025?
Given that AI companies are constantly trying to slurp up any and all data online, if the model was derived from existing work, it's maybe less impressive than at first glance. If present-day model does well at IMO 2026, that would be nice.
- And if they don't request a format (or if you ask, and the response is "what's a format"), you need to use one that's 99.99% supported.
- Yeah, the "2% growth forever" feels like a sneaky addition which is extremely controversial in economic theory: if endless growth is required. 1.02 ** 1000 ~= 400,000,000. So if the world population continued to grow at 2% in those same 1000 years, there'd be 2.8 quintillion people. Evenly distributed over the planet (water included), each person would get a square 1.35 centimeters on a side.
- Lifecycle analysis is a common and increasingly detailed field which includes impacts to manufacture, transport, install, run, and clean-up installations, either cradle-to-grave, or cradle-to-cradle (includes the cost of recycling). I assume for installations like this, those studies have been done.
There's a whole tirade in "Landman" about wind turbines not being green because of this or that thing[0], ending with the statement: "in its 20-year lifespan, it won't offset the carbon footprint of making it". These are just feelings (of the fictional character, but unfortunately ones adopted by real people) that are unconcerned with the facts that, no, the lifecycle analysis shows that wind turbines break even in 1.8 to 22.5 months, with an average of 5.3 months[1].
- Maybe these are the windmills that drive the whales crazy? To paraphrase wind-watch.org (sounds non-partisan)
> The obvious concern that most people might guess will be dangerous and damaging to [swimming] wildlife are the spinning blades themselves. While large white spinning [turbine] blades rotating [below] the horizon or in an advertisement seem bucolic, restive, and like the perfect green energy source, the fact is that the tips of the blades can be spinning at up to 200 miles per hour. Those speeding blades can act like a giant blender for large [fish] such as [tuna] and [whales] which fly around the commercial [water] turbines and chop those [fish] up. Biologists have found that even small species of American [fish] regularly get killed from the spinning turbines of commercial [water] turbines.
/s
Also, what's an 'ad' is an extreme spectrum nowadays with free stuff given out in exchange for a post, people trying to act like paid influencers to fake it until they make it, paid influencers, and listicle affiliate link slop.