That is a good point. You'd be interesting to determine the value of any content used as training. I suspect it would be something like 1* 10^-6 cents. I think it'd be much more useful to take some share of the profits and feed it back into some form of social fund used to provide services for humans.
A buddy of mine and I bought Kim-1 systems. We did all the usual things, abusing the TTY interface to rs232, overclocking the CPU so it could go faster than 9600 baud, hacking Microsoft basic so it would run on the Kim-1
I wrote an interrupt driven cassette data writer to record data while the foreground was doing something else.
The project was to strap a Kim-1 and a cassette recorder to the chest of a skydiver and record their cardiac data after they jumped out of the plane. We wanted to be able to preserve as much of the data as possible should the skydiver go splat. Kind of dark but you know, programming is not all unicorns and rainbows.
Then I did boring stuff like running fig-forth, building my own floppy disc controller and forth block disk drivers. You know, the usual Kim-1 stuff
Yeah I described trends in software development is like the length of skirts. They both have the same logic behind the changes. But I don't consider type systems to be hype. I think they're frequently poorly implemented with a mathematically illiterate notation but they're so damn useful went done reasonably right
Most of my understanding on type systems comes from taking a course on the calculation of programs from the author of this book.
To be blunt, this course and the understanding this book gave me crystallized why I was unhappy with the current state of software development and it was one more nudge pushing me out of the field. I caution others that reading and understanding this book may change your understanding of the software development world enough that you don't want to be part of it either.
Programming in the 1990s: An Introduction to the Calculation of Programs | Springer Nature Link (formerly SpringerLink) https://share.google/K81ZlVTbfoR2oeYLh
I compared the weights of EVs versus ICE, and they were surprisingly close. Most of time, the differences were in the 15% range, and then you find exceptions like the Hummer, which is 30% heavier. I'm sure it comes as no surprise That the heavier the vehicle, the bigger the difference in ICE versus EV weight.
While I think lighter weight vehicles of all types would be a big win, I fear that ship has sailed. I think we have an opportunity to reset vehicle size both from a desire for cheaper and simpler vehicles. Look at cost and weight of the BYD EVs and the new pickup trucks from Slate and Telos.
Overall, I find the slightly increased weight for an EV to be an acceptable trade-off. Brakes last longer, tires, depending on make, are about 10% shorter life at most and overall maintenance is much less. Since I keep my cars until the body goes toes up, I have a much lower carbon footprint. than the 3yr lease route
If you give the difference in weight as a percentage, it is sort of surprising that the percentage is higher for heavier vehicles, right? Or at least I don’t get it. I’d expect the EV to be a constant factor heavier, a total weight of combustion_vehicle*1.1 or something.
I wonder if it's sorta like the rocket equation. A heavier vehicle requires larger batteries to move the extra weight with a comparable range as a smaller vehicle, but the batteries are heavy too, so you need even more battery to move the heavier batteries.
It's exactly that. Battery = heavy, heavy vehicle = short range. I wonder if ICE vehicle weight is calculated with a full fuel tank? Gas / Diesel is also pretty heavy and large vehicles have large empty spaces to be filled with fuel.
I had a 2010s Civic and moved to a Model 3. The curb weight difference was only ~3-400 lbs (about 10%), but the larger battery capacity, large SUV offerings are significantly heavier than ICE options (the F150 Lightning is about 2,000 pounds heavier than an ICE F150, for example, 5,000 -> 7,000 lbs.).
The 8th Gen Civic in heaviest config was about 2900lb. The lightest model 3 is about 3500lb. 600lb best case. The lighter config Civic was 2500lb (not usdm iirc) vs the heaviest model 3 being 4000lb.
I believe you have it right. In theory, power generation should have been a well-regulated monopoly. Unfortunately, as soon as you add investors, aka rent seekers, the system is pushed to increase profits at the expense of the customer.
We should reset the monopoly by publishing and documenting tariffs for power and carriage. Third-party power suppliers should still have access to the power grid, with complete, transparent, and understandable costs for consumers.
There needs to be a plan for continual upgrades and maintenance, rather than starving the grid and then requiring big bursts of funding that go in part to the rent seekers.
Snark aside, let me remind you of the term "enchitification": it came about because companies in theoretically competitive markets make good products shittier.
> The question is whether 401k plans and job-hopping still works out in the end.
It can, but it is a fragile "still works out in the end." It fails when a damaging event occurs near the time you need the money, such as a late-in-life divorce, job loss, illness, or financial collapse of investment vehicles. Winning at the 401(k) game means enough people losing their money through unlucky investments, and you get a cut of their losses.
Thought experiment: imagine everyone had enough income that they could save 10% in a 401 (k). BLS numbers say 10% of us wages is 1.1 trillion. Can you imagine the impact on the stock market if it received $1.1 trillion every year for 30 years? Where would that money be invested?
reply