he's actually right you know. the photons produced by a light source do end up generating heat when they radiate down from the visible spectrum

it's all electromagnetic radiation, you know? heat is just lower wavelengths. our older devices used different methods to make light, methods that put more of its radiation directly into heat. newer methods use less electricity but still 100% heat.

do you know how many btu's the sun rains down on the planet every day? the heat generated by computational power is inconsequential and always will be.

the market has assigned a value to the bitcoin proof of work, who are you to disagree with it? are you an oracle?

so i don't know if you have your head too far up your ass to understand this or not, but the major assumption you're making that's wrong is that bitcoin wastes energy.

bitcoin uses exactly as much energy as the network assigns value to be performed. the price of acquiring hardware asics + data center + k/wh electric + labor to maintain is exactly equal to the value of performing the work. There is literally no "waste" in bitcoin, because every week the difficulty adjusts to accommodate fluctuations in the hashpower of the combined network.

bitcoin represents a load placed on the system, sure, but it's not a zero sum game. the electrical demand finds ways to recoup unused electrical by converting otherwise wasted sources of energy into monetary value.

bitcoin can and will be a major source of optimizing the electrical grid in the future.

As a publicly traded company this is required to be divulged in their SEC filing.

What is the environmental cost of video streaming?

why? i think the inference here is that he feels he can go get a job anywhere. so why would his current corporations interests influence his vote?

so, i am 100% on board the save our planet band wagon, but can someone help me understand how and why it takes 2 artists to come up with and implement an idea on an already existing installation that merely counts down the time until the "point of no return" of the mercator report on climate change?

it brings us to a disturbing question, was the government of anything, even our own democracy, ever but a facade for the interests of capital? Those interests may have been held in check periodically and maybe the periodic check is the best we can ever hope for, but this realization is something that our public schools never would speak about or teach about, because control of the curriculum is in the hands of the government.

balancing libertarian views and liberal views is an exercise all people should go through and i hope that comes through in this post.

I like reading your thoughts on the matter and think they have value and you've provided many measurable metrics that can be used to measure a form of productivity. But that's the problem I feel right is that ultimately they are an objective measure of /something/ more or less tangible, but none are a measure of impact or quality. Many of the best lines of code are the shortest blocks and written in the least amount of time, but they took weeks of careful thought to understand how to do them so elegantly. They took immeasurable collaborations that occurred outside of measurement systems and so on.

I am a manager of coders and I understand the value of measurement and I do measure but we don't use any of the measurements to judge people. we use them to help plan projects and assign work, but the reviews remain entirely subjective because i don't think you can measure a persons quality or value with metrics.

but i do think you're right that a lot of managers and their management are over-reliant on data for decision making reasons. i think a lot of middle management loves data because data can be used to create a story. with data you can make almost any story you want that provides justification for any action you want, and the mere presence of "data" can be used as the fall guy. "Oh i had to do x because the data". instead of taking responsibility as a manager, or the laws or company policies allowing a manager to take responsibility, you kind of use the data as a faceless enforcer. but that said even that data in the hands of an unintutive management can lead to incorrect actions and unintended concequences.

so productivity data is ok, but it really needs to be only part of a managers decision making events. but like someone said elsewhere, in this specific case, chances are pretty good Dimon's measure of productivity is actually $$$ revenue generated, which leaves out all the other factors and only focuses on one, which if you're running a company is a pretty important one, but again, focusing on revenue sometimes you lose the forest through the trees as well and miss other signals that are causing changes in revenue.

Been following this story on other outlets and watching it make its way around the various aggregators and so here it shows up on Slashdot.

So my main critique is that the article seems to cherry pick incidents. it doesn't talk at all about frequency of incidents compared to sales volumes. Anecdotally, I've had really good luck with Amazon basics products, so my initial reaction is one of skepticism.

What level of failure is acceptable in a product? Is it a zero failure environment we expect, or do we need to leave room for anomalies? I know we don't live in a perfect world, but we need to have reasonable expectations the products we use aren't at all likely to cause us damage to life or property. But again, accidents will happen, things aren't perfect. So my question is how to Amazon products compare to products of other companies when adjusted for scale? This article fails on that measure.

Elon Musk has assembled a remarkable group of people that can do some pretty amazing things, but before I sign up for their internet product we need some major assurances from them about privacy and how they are going to monetize data streams. Obviously we have been making this transition for a while what with the larger ISP's and mobile providers already doing certain amounts of user tracking, but i feel like spacex is uniquely positioned to kick that into overdrive, especially with its immediately ubiquitous nature. in the past, ISP networks were spread all over the place, so collecting information from them was tricky. with Starlink, it will almost come pre-engineered for easy sigint and data collection.

there's a lot to be excited about but there's also a lot to be fearful of. musk and his companies are attaching themselves even more fundamentally to humanity. google and facebook rely on other providers, but with starlink, musk and team control the transport layer and that is a tremendous amount of power held by what amounts to a monopoly.

further research indicates he's not actually a us citizen.

OK ARM THE TORPEDOES, THE CANUCK IS OUT.

Shatner is a naturalized US Citizen, which is good enough for holding military rank and necessary security clearances. His opinion matters just as much as someone born here. In the spirit of Trek, we shouldn't make such discrimination based on his unfortunate country of origin.

So far as I know, the only position exclusive to someone born here is POTUS.