A practical issue with a circle is that it is not a circle until it is finished,

That's not the reason at all, AFAIK. The reasoning is, okay, we want people to be able to move from one place to some distance place in the city at the maximum comfortable speed, which is limited by G-forces. You have some guaranteed G-forces from first accelerating and then decelerating. But if it's linear, that's your only G forces. If it's curved, however, you also have radial G-forces.

The Line's train going from one end to the other (170km) nonstop is supposed to do it in 20 minutes, aka with a mean speed of ~510 kph. Let's say a peak of 800 kph. Now if we shape that 170km into a circle, that's 54km diameter, 27km radius. From the centripetal force formula a=v^2/r, that's 222,22...^2 / 27000 ~= 1,83 m/s^2, or a constant ~0,2g to the side. This is on top of the G-forces from your acceleration and deceleration. You can probably deal with ~0,2g in a train if everyone is seated without much discomfort, though it's double what's acceptable for standing passengers. But you can eliminate that if the city is linear (at the cost of increasing the mean distance that the average person has to travel to go from one arbitrary point in the city to another)

That's not to defend this concept. Because the city doesn't need to be 170km long; you can just made it more 2d and have the distances be vastly shorter (at the cost of just needing some extra lateral travel within the city). Honestly, if I were building a "designer" city from the ground up, I'd use a PRT (Personal Rapid Transit) system rather than trying to make it super-elongated.

I wouldn't be so certain that China's model won't come to dominate eventually, because we don't seem to be able to fix our democracies. There are clear flaws that are being exploited now, and the inability to adequately deal with climate change while China races ahead is both a moral and economic failure.

I'd very much prefer democracy to be the winning model, but it won't just happen by itself. Look at the rise of populist right wingers - people will vote away their rights and prosperity in exchange for nothing more than rhetoric, if they think that democracy isn't delivering for them.

WebP only got an RFC (9649) in November 2024. JXL hasn't even got that far.

I hope JXL does catch on, but until Chrome supports it that will not happen. Maybe now that it's required for PDF display, Google will be forced to re-adopt it.

To be fair I think the reason they dropped support for JPEG XL is because the reference C library is crap, and last time I looked none of the alternatives were very mature. Hopefully things have improved by now.

What got me is that I don't see why this isn't readily resolved by active damping, the same systems that many tall towers now use to resist earthquakes or resonant wind forces. Big heavy weight at the top (or in this case the bottom) hooked up to actuators that make it move in an inverse direction to the sway.

Again, this is not to defend this colossal waste of money. I just don't see why there aren't ready solutions for this specific problem.

Agreed - but that said, there are space elevator alternatives, like the Lofstrom Loop / Launch Loop, which at least theoretically can be built with modern materials (and have far better properties anyway - not latitude-constrained, provides dV, vastly higher throughput, far more efficient, stores energy / can add cheap energy at off-peak times, etc). One could always "waste" money on them trying something new :)

But the growth is exponential. It is far from its peak this year.

The pace is likely to keep increasing and deployment gets easier, turbines get bigger, and costs continue to fall. Solar PV is so cheap it's being used as fence panelling.

At this point, any significant emitter is a high priority. We can't afford to do all this stuff sequentially, we have to parallelize our efforts.

It won't make any difference to security either. In fact, it will probably just make it worse. Huawei is one of the few vendors that supplies source code for security review (under NDA).

At least China has now proven that not only can an economy thrive with renewable energy (remember all the hand wringing about the lights going out and destroying manufacturing?), but it can in fact be a hugely lucrative market.

The other big emitters should be looking at China with envy, and seeking to catch up before they are left behind with only expensive fossil and nuclear power.

Oh my poor innocent sweet summer consumer...

You actually think HR has anything to do with helping workers. No, misguided one

No, no, no.

HR exists to protect the company _from_ it's employees. If US companies are expanding their HR, then they're preparing for war with their own employees.

Wikipedia officially requires articles to summarize their sources from a neutral point of view. However, Wikipedia did become overtly political with the PROTECT IP blackout of January 18, 2012, in protest of a proposed law seen to threaten Wikipedia's existence.

The first time you add a website to your home screen, it installs the website's service worker. You have to use the Internet for that, just as you have to use the Internet to download an application from Apple's App Store.

And I'm curious about what the blockers for even a partial PWA implementation have been during each of these 12 years.

All I've been asking is what features of Grab combined with missing features of PWA likely led to their continuing to choose native apps.

I don't see where I "assume[d] to know better than Grab".

- market is a collection of all people involved, who is better suited to decide on what the value is other than all of the people as a collective vote?

- they are removing the money from the gullible, which may be argued is a better way to redistribute the money (all done willingly even though misguidedly).

- the market has already decided that the parents of heirs were productive enough, that even their heirs can now enjoy the fruits of the labor of the people who made the money.

- dangerous by what measure?

However, most people who ask that do it while pointing to people who are actually quite important producers, such as financiers. Be careful not to conflate "don't produce anything of value" with "do something I don't understand the importance of".

Of course there are people in every profession who get paid a lot more than they're worth. This is less true of manual labor jobs where the output is easy to see and measure, but it's true across the board. Even in manual labor jobs you can have people whose output is negative. They may pick X apples or whatever, but they might do it while making everyone around them work slower.

Just to complete the description of the "empty chair" tactic, this is why lawsuits typically name anyone and everyone who might possibly be blamed, including many who clearly aren't culpable. It's not because the plaintiff or the plaintiff's attorney actually thinks all of those extra targets really might be liable, it's so that the culpable parties can't try to shift the blame to an empty chair, forcing the plaintiff to explain why the empty chair isn't culpable (i.e., defend them). Of course this means that those clearly non-culpable parties might have to defend themselves, which sucks for them.