Singing is pretty much a commodity service now. With autotune almost anyone can do it, but you can hire a professional for not a lot of money. It's good that people get work instead of AI slop, but also the rates are very low and it's a side gig at most.

The people who making a living from it tend to have other talents too. Song writing, stage performance, looking conventionally attractive, building up a social media following, etc.

AI probably won't change much in that respect.

It's incredible that anyone still invests in it, after Musk publicly admitted it was a scam.

And "the only solution for trips over 300 miles"? Less than an hour via existing maglev technology, which both Japan and China are deploying as we speak. That's just the start though, maglev can probably double that speed, close to the speed of sound. The issue is the noise, and you don't need a vacuum tube to solve it.

I'm hoping for more than normal. Big floods of used but perfectly serviceable drives and memory hitting the market, at bankruptcy prices.

Also can they please hurry up and get LTO 10 out the door, so that LTO 8 drives get cheap? Thanks.

It's a borderline scam, where so many jobs, even minimum wage ones, need a degree just to get past the application submission stage, that a degree is almost mandatory in many fields. A lot of it is employers transferring the cost of training to the employee.

It also blows the meritocracy arguments out of the water, because a person's ability to get high level qualifications is highly dependent on their ability to pay. Not just pay for college, but to not work so much they don't have time to do extra studying or non-core activities.

I too bought memory in April to avoid tariffs. I had to run a stupid python program to generate a dataset that required 96GB of RAM for a delayed project so I figured I might as well bite the bullet. DDR4 was still a good value at that point (it's a problem that can run overnight, performance wasn't too important).

But how are the tariffs limiting the manufacturing supply capacity of RAM factories in East Asia?

Do you have a mechanism to propose?

Do you think they're making enough to meet demand but then blaming tariffs to justify jacking up prices? All of them? It would be an interesting conspiracy but is there any evidence to support that theory?

> How much is this problem is down to AI and how much to beautiful tariffs?

What mechanism are you thinking of where tariffs could limit supply of VRAM from East Asia?

Simple price increases, sure, definitely, but this is described by manufacturers as a supply & demand problem.

Do you have a different angle we should consider?

The degree isn't about "getting a high-paid job", it's about knowing what the hell you're doing once you get a job. Although, fair enough, it's quite plausible that not many degrees would meet that standard either.

There is a possibility of a short-circuit causing an engine shutdown. Apparently, there is a known fault whereby a short can result in the FADEC "fail-safing" to engine shutdown, and this is one of the competing theories as the wiring apparently runs near a number of points in the aircraft with water (which is a really odd design choice).

Now, I'm not going to sit here and tell you that (a) the wiring actually runs there (the wiring block diagrams are easy to find, but block diagrams don't show actual wiring paths), (b) that there is anything to indicate that water could reach such wiring in a way that could cause a short, or (c) that it actually did so. I don't have that kind of information.

All I can tell you, at this point, is that aviation experts are saying that a short at such a location would cause an engine shutdown and that Boeing was aware of this risk.

I will leave it to the experts to debate why they're using electrical signalling (it's slower than fibre, heavier than fibre, can corrode, and can short) and whether the FADEC fail-safes are all that safe or just plain stupid. For a start, they get paid to shout at each other, and they actually know what specifics to shout at each other about.

But, if the claims are remotely accurate, then there were a number of well-known flaws in the design and I'm sure Boeing will just love to answer questions on why these weren't addressed. The problem being, of course, is that none of us know which of said claims are indeed remotely accurate, and that makes it easy for air crash investigators to go easy on manufacturers.

It's easy to have unique keys in your spreadsheet so that you can easily relate information on different sheets to one another. The problem is, actually doing the processing that a SQL server would do trivially is irritating, and then it will be processed slowly every time. Whatever Excel does or doesn't cache, it isn't enough. You can do big complicated things, but they work slowly, and maintaining it is irritating at best. When you do complicated things either your formulas get long, or you wind up having to write code, or in fact often it's both. At that point you're way better off IMO doing it in something else so that at least performance is good when you're done, and you never have to screw with editing a long formula.

That's exactly why it should be in a database and not a spreadsheet. Spreadsheets are best when you have a reasonably limited number of columns. It's also a horrible PITA to use them as a relational database (it's more or less possible, but you don't want to do it) so hiding pieces of that complexity in other sheets in order to limit the data the user interfaces with on the main sheet is just a lot of extra work you wouldn't have to do if you used another solution.

It doesn't really matter where it fails, if Excel can do it and Sheets can't then Google has to admit inferiority to Microsoft which is never a good look.

It's far from indisputable. Indeed, it's hotly disputed within the aviation industry. That does NOT mean that it was a short-circuit (although that is a theory that is under investigation), it merely means that "indisputable" is not the correct term to use here. You can argue probabilities or reasonableness, but you CANNOT argue "indisputable" when specialists in the field in question say that it is, in fact, disputed.

If you were to argue that the most probable cause was manual, then I think I could accept that. If you were to argue that Occam's Razor required that this be considered H0 and therefore a theory that must be falsified before others are considered, I'd not be quite so comfortable but would accept that you've got to have some sort of rigorous methodology and that's probably the sensible one.

But "indisputable"? No, we are not at that stage yet. We might reach that stage, but we're not there yet.

Seems more like political problems. They have been trying to build large wind farms and export cables for years. If they can't even manage that, they have no hope of building nuclear.

It's a tragedy really. They have massive amounts of space for this stuff. A lot of sun, and good on and off shore wind resources. The domestic solar market is actually doing okay, because it gets less political interference and there isn't all that much that can be done to stop people putting panels on their homes.

I would be surprised if software updating an aircraft is that simple. It probably needs to be controlled and tested after the update, with records kept by maintenance staff, and notifications sent to pilots.

You're taking a very precise definition of 'neo-classical economics' which isn't what I was seeking to defend, so I understand your scepticism.

At university I had as my main text book Lipsey's 'Positive Economics', which was an attempt to introduce the basic concepts of economics that pretty much universally agreed. It's those concepts, which are, as much as anything can be proven, the 'scientific basis' for economics.

Just occasionally we get countries carrying out a strikingly new economic policy that allows us to see what happens. A recent example of this was Erdogan's refusal to raise interest rates despite rapidly rising inflation in Turkey. After several years of this, he finally returned to what every economist was telling him to do, and inflation is beginning to come under control

https://fortune.com/europe/202...

In Chile Pinochet's adoption of market economics after the coup against Allende lend to short term pain but long term gain, a pattern which was repeated when Poland emerged from socialism in the 1990s, creating what is now a dynamic economy.

Etc. etc. No doubt Bernanke did indulge in a degree of hubris in 2007; that doesn't mean that the central ideas of economics are flawed.