Oh God. Anyone aligning themselves with Yarvin in anyway is highly highly questionable. He wants to completely destroy US democracy, and is at least partially responsible for the mess the US is currently mired in.
If by "the movement," you mean Occupy Wall St., one of the things about it as an organization is that it didn't have a mechanism to exclude people really, if I understand correctly. So there was a pretty broad slice of political philosophies united around the common idea "The system that rewards risk-takers for taking risks with other people's money while consolidating the consequences on those who did not consent to the risks is fundamentally flawed."
I know what you're referring to, but this one is well-documented. When Tunney and I were last in overlapping circles, she self-described as techno-fascist. It's pretty well-documented (though I apologize for assuming it was common knowledge; since I was there and knew of her to only one or two degrees of separation, it's easy for me to forget she's not necessarily a well-known name).
... also, my intent was not to cast aspersions. When last I heard the name, I had a particular political leaning associated to the name and I was wondering if it had changed.
Stefan-Boltzmann is about absolute, not relative temperature.
When one does the math on the operating temperatures of regular computing equipment that we use on Earth, how much heat it generates per watt, and how fast it would need to sink that heat to allow for continuous operation, one gets surface areas that are not impossible, but are pretty on the high end of anything we've ever built in space.
And then you have to deflect the incoming light from the Sun which will be adding to your temperature (numbers published by private space companies regarding the tolerances of payloads those companies are willing to carry note that those payloads have to be tolerant of temperatures exceeding 100° C, from solar radiation alone). That is doable, you could sunshield the sensitive equipment and possibly decrease some of your thermal input load by putting your craft out near L2 which hangs out in the penumbra of Earth. Still a daunting technical challenge when the alternative is just build it on the planet with the technology and methods we already have.
You’re correct that Stefan-Boltzmann uses absolute temperature (K), but that only reinforces the advantage of moving the "hot side" of the gradient up. If you increase your radiator temp from 300K (standard Earth ambient) to 360K (hot silicon), your radiative efficiency doesn't just go up by 20%—it nearly doubles.
The Solar Load is Directional: Unlike a terrestrial atmosphere where heat is omnidirectional, space allows for "shadow engineering." A simple multi-layer insulation (MLI) sunshield can reduce solar flux by orders of magnitude. We do this for the James Webb Space Telescope to keep instruments at 7K while the sun-facing side is at 380K. For a data center, you don't need 7K; you just need to keep the "dark side" radiators in the shade.
The author did not make such a statement, rather (it appears to me), that they were surprised instead by the lack of empathy exhibited by said similar-origin agents. A feeling that is shared by a lot of people who are opposed to the inhumane brutality being meted out, without repercussions, by ICE agents.
Because race is a story we tell ourselves, it turns out to not be as hard as one might assume to bend the story to make ingroups and outgroups out of people that, to an outside observer, should have more in common than their interactions suggest they do.
Anyone can do that. How often so you think a racist CEO funds a fascist president who funds the opression of immigrants, killing them?
Anyway,you are in personal responsibiliry land and been told you are tge master of your domain. Rarely do people who think individuality is paramount care about society. Your example along allows you to fixate on anecdotes because they hit your dopami e.
For what it's worth, that kind of lumping of drivers is more-or-less one of the metrics Waymo is using to self-evaluate. Perfect safety when multi-ton vehicles share space with sub-300-pound humans is impossible. But they ultimately seek to do better than humans in all contexts.
It's true, but the main reason I haven't just switched to an iPhone is the ecosystem that lets me write apps without having to pay Apple money or use their computers.
If Google is narrowing their moat on this, there are a lot fewer reasons for me, personally, to stay on the platform.
I'm not quite sure I catch your meaning; "it" is an unbound pronoun in that sentence.
If I assume "it" means "programming on a mobile device": yes, it is. Apple cares an awful lot about the developer experience, has massive support, and a deep well of shareable knowledge. Google is about the same (the developer experience is a little patchier; I'd generously call Google's approach to devex on Android "bag-of-cats vision" and since one is not developing on, generally, a vertically-integrated tech stack, one has to struggle a bit more to get the tools set up and maintained).
The big selling point for Android is freedom of that stack, and if they throw sand in those gears, the benefits of the vertically-integrated stack that you have to pay-to-play start to become actually enticing.
XML was abandoned because we realized bandwidth costs money and while it was too late to do anything about how verbose HTML is, we didn't have to repeat the mistake with our data transfer protocols.
Even with zipped payloads, it's just way unnecessarily chatty without being more readable.
Your memory is correct. Once compression was applied, the size on the wire was mostly a wash. Parsing costs were often greater but that's at the endpoints.
But one of those endpoints is a client on a mobile phone, which when we started with Internet on mobile devices wasn't a particularly powerful CPU architecture.
This is true, but if other formats work for those purposes and also network transmission, they'll start to edge out the alternative of supporting two different protocols in your stack.
if bandwidth was a concern, JSON was a poor solution. XML compresses nicely and efficiently. Yes it can be verbose to the human eyes, but I don't know if bandwidth is the reason it's not used more often.
JSON absolutely isn't perfect, but it's a spec that you can explain in ~5 minutes, mirrors common PL syntax for Dict/Array, and is pretty much superior to XML in every way.
To my mind, this is the huge bit that should not be overlooked.
So much infrastructure is there to support doing "it" in the Cloud, for all definitions of "it." If we can vibe-code bespoke one-offs to solve our problems, a lot of that Cloud interaction goes away... And that stuff is expensive and complicated.
Hypothetically, open source app stores (I'm counting apt here) address this, but then it's someone else's solution to my problem, which doesn't quite fit my problem perfectly.
This approach to software engineering could be what 3D printing is to tangible artifacts (and I mean that including the limits of 3D printing regarding tangible artifacts, but even still.)
Hey, if ECHELON snuck a listener into my house, where six devices hang out on a local router... Good for them, they're welcome to my TODO lists and vast collection of public-domain 1950s informational videos.
(I wouldn't recommend switching the option off for anything that could transit the Internet or be on a LAN with untrusted devices. I am one of those old sods who doesn't believe in the max-paranoia setting for things like "my own house," especially since if I dial that knob all the way up the point is moot; they've already compromised every individual device at the max-knob setting, so a timing attack on my SSH packet speed is a waste of effort).
An interoperable search index access standard might work. We've done something similar for peering and the backbone of the IP-layer interconnects themselves.
You have to make it economically preferable, and there's No known solution to this. Large networks are still using their positions to bully smaller ones off the IP-layer internet backbone.
But in this current climate, they can admit it and then dare Google to tell them to stop... After Google has just had an antitrust ruling against it for dominating the search market.
Google doesn't really have a leg to stand on and they know it.
reply