Most of these studies get published based on elaborate constructions of essentially t-tests for differences in means between groups. Showing the opposite means showing no statistical difference, which is almost impossible to get published, for very human reasons.

My point was exactly not to do that (which is really an unsuccesfull replication), but instead to find the actual, live correlation between the same input rigourously documented and justified, and new "positive" conclusion.

As I said, harder from a research perspective, but if you can show, for instance, that sustainable companies are less profitable with a better study, you have basically contradicted the original one.

Non-tech people tend to think similarly about developers, breaking things that worked fine until yesterday / last week / last month, for no user-visible benefit.

Sometimes that's true.

Here's John Cochrane take on Fed vs Narrow Banks: https://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2019/03/fed-vs-narrow-ban...

TLDR: Cochrane thinks the Fed wants keep a lid on narrow banking because it believes it can cross-subsidizing lending to households and businesses from retail deposits.

Rather than leaving some oblique references to "many good books", why not provide the actual references?

"Production" can mean many different things to different people. It's very widely used as a backend strutured file format in Android and iOS/macOS (e.g. for appls like Notes, Photos). Is that "production"? It's not widely used and largely inappropriate for applications with many concurrent writes.

Sqlite docs has a good overview of appropriate and inappropriate uses: https://sqlite.org/whentouse.html It's best to start with Section 2 "Situations Where A Client/Server RDBMS May Work Better"

Sorry for my negativity / meta comment on this thread. From what I can tell the stackexchange discussion in the submission already to provides all the relevant points to be discussed about this.

While the asymmetry of least squares will probably be a bit of a novelty/surprise to some, pretty much anything posted here is more or less a copy of one of the comments on stackexchange.

[Challenge: provide a genuinely novel on-topic take on the subject.]

The stackexchange discussion already provides a good answer.

I think there is not much to be said. It is not a puzzle for us to solve, just a neat little mathematical observation.

But bringing it up as a topic, aside from being informative, allows for more varied conversation that is allowed on stack exchange, like exploring alternative modeling approaches. It may not have happened, but the possibility can only present itself given the opportunity

This answer is too grown-up for the forum.

I'm believe /sbin was introduced/standardized in System V Release 4. It's present in SVR4 (1988) but not in SVR3 (1987). Another candidate is would be some old BSD (check 4.2 or 4.3 (1986) if anyone has a running system).

I'm guessing it was introduced to finally move out all the (mostly system) binaries from /etc, which in ancient Unix from Bell Labs in the 1970s really meant "etc", as in stuff that didn't fit elsewhere rather than system config files, so it contained binaries like init, mount, umount.

macOS has all of that (mostly inherited from NeXTSTEP which was significantly based on 4.3/4.4BSD). It's hidden by default in the GUI, visible in Terminal.

Nowadays most end users just use /usr/local or /opt/local or whatever is managed by Homebrew or Macports.

This is Unix V4 from 1973. The total number of installations world wide was around 20, all inside Bell Labs. There was no networking support at all, so security was mostly physical, i.e., office building security (though you could dial in with a modem). Multi-user support was a bunch of serial-line terminals. Pretty much everyone knew everyone else who was on the system.

They were already mailing distribution tapes -- the software being run here was extracted off one of them (which had literally been lost in a store room for decades).

I'd reverse the question ask why Germany (or any other country where English is not an official language, and does not majorly rely on tourism for income) would provide any public information in English? Commercial services can choose to do so a matter of self interest, but why would state financed services?

Because the State wants to attract well educated international workers to fix it's failing economy?

Problem is that failing to communicate will lead to huge productivity holes, so to "fix it", either the natives need to learn a non native language or the incoming immigrants need to learn the native language..

So, attracting the international workforce to come Germany vs being able to fully utilise them are completely different ballparks..

This is Germany we're talking about, right? Something like half the population already speaks English to some degree and that is specifically concentrated in the part of the country that is already highly educated and would be working with those immigrants.

A "well educated" international worker willing to relocate in Germany would probably learn the language.

Educated immigrants often consider countries interchangeable. They are in a country, because they found an opportunity and took it. But they are not committed to stay, because better opportunities could arise elsewhere. When you have already immigrated once, doing it again is only going to get easier.

Immigrants with fewer opportunities are more likely to try to learn the language and integrate. When a country is offering them something they can't find anywhere else, it makes more sense to go through all that effort. Even knowing that they will probably never fully fit in.

You're really wondering why a state-funded service would consider the needs of tourists?

Yes. AFAICT, catering to the needs of tourists ranks very low among German voter priorities.

But catering the needs of the tourism sector ranks where?

I do not see the relation, mate.

English is the most common lingua franca.