The first one, the one based on the book, was great and did fly a good deal under the radar. But definitely one of those ones with a core fanbase that evangelized for it and good critical notices. Elsewhere in this discussion Jared Harris's role in Foundation has been mentioned; he's a major, consistent, and excellent fixture in The Terror.
Since they used the book's story already, they made a turn for the series to be an anthology of loosely thematically-similar stories (think American Horror Story). The basic setting of season 2 is Japanese internment during World War II in America, and it's from different writers than the first, and of course isn't adapting the novel anymore. It was much less popular both in terms of viewers and critics.
I'm a little surprised they think the brand still carries enough power to put another original story in there under its name for a season 3. It's also a bit of a double-edged sword: you do get name recognition and some built-in initial audience, but you're also taking on expectations and baggage from the original. This is a factor in season 2's tepid reception, and there have been other similar attempts to slide something unrelated in under an existing banner that backfired: True Detective Night Country comes to mind.
The saddest part to me is that their status update page and twitter are both out of date. I get a full 500 on github.com and yet all I see on their status page is an "incident with pull requests" and "copilot policy propagation delays."
Yes, the title is exaggerated. But I think a lot of you are underestimating the societal impact of roughly half a billion climate refugees. That kind of destabilization could easily lead to societal collapse, world war, etc...
The Syrian refugee crisis meant something like a million people fleeing into Europe and it caused massive political upheavals.
And the company I worked for hired a full devops team to save us like 5 grand per month on Heroku, only to end up with a much worse developer experience.
This problem one doesn't have, if one pays attention to devops from the start, maybe keeping 1 or 2 capable devops people, who keep things lean. Problem is of course finding the capable ones with the right mindset to keep things as simple and lean as possible.
The result of suddenly needing to hire devops should be to get a convenient setup, but then do you really still need the whole devops team? And if you don't, then hiring them for limited time might come at a cost (hiring freelancers or consultants).
I agree, but I've found that making an "adversarial" model within claude helps with the quality a lot. One agent makes the change, the other picks holes in it, and cycle. In the end, I'm left with less to review.
This sounds more like an automation of that idea than just N-times the work.
Well it isn't a perfect vacuum and it does have a temperature. But temperature is only a part of the story, just like how you go hypothermic a lot faster in 50 degree water than in 50 degree air.
I think that wind farms dotted along the entire US coast would be a bad target for crippling US power compared to a few coal/gas/nuclear mega power plants.
"Launching a constellation of a million satellites that operate as orbital data centers is a first step towards becoming a Kardashev II-level civilization"
So, basically give ourselves Kessler syndrome. Or is Elon trying to monopolize orbit entirely?
I can see why that regulation would be in place though. I don't want heavy industrial machinery coming with "here's how to make it run faster and stronger but ruin the environment, which you definitely should not do wink wink."
It's a reasonable goal, but I think that one can find better ways to meet that goal than making manufacturers responsible for what the owner of the equipment does with it. That method is just insanely unfair to the manufacturer.
It'll be hard to do because it's like the more restrictive gun laws. It'll never stick so they never take it though court, but they threaten it to get the conduct they want. OEMs have spent huge sums locking down computer systems "because emissions".
The EPA has a ton of ways to expensively scrutinize (heavy on the "screw") oems at their discretion so it doesn't really need to be a serious threat, just a warning.
Same dynamic as local business vs local code enforcers basically.
The CAA allows parties with no standing to sue, to magically have standing to sue, and then have their victims pay lawyers fees (or otherwise go to jail[0]). So there's no need for the EPA to get involved. You can just be sued by, say " Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment" and end up paying unlimited lawyers fees because some guy 300 miles away says you dropped a particle of carbon on them.
reply