If each human body needs 0.2 acre of land to grow the food necessary for subsistence, what happens when the price of intelligence keeps dropping and one person's intelligence (even when directed towards the highest-value use!) is not enough to afford the use of that land? In other words, what happens when humans are no longer economically viable?
Jevon's Paradox means that the demand for intelligence will keep rising as the cost drops, so I can't help but expect a steady increase in the economic value of land _when used for AI_. It'll take a long time before it exceeds the economic value of land when used for human subsistence, but the growth curves are not pointing in encouraging directions.
AGI / human overlords that cater to AGI won't need earth resources for more than a few decades. There will be a bootstrapping period, reliant on earth resources but soon it will be much cleaner to have solar/nuclear in space and have robotic mining of raw resources from asteroids.
> "In addition to help prevent the pen from leaking, [...]"
So maybe the hole somehow prevents leaks, which would prevent drying in the sense of no more ink :) Maybe it prevents leaks by making the ink at the tip dry out.
I grew up in rural New Zealand, on a dairy farm. I agree that the needs of suburban and rural communities are very different from the needs of urban communities, but what confuses me is why Americans (and increasingly, Kiwis) need a vehicle the size of a Dodge Ram rather than one the size of a 1990 HiLux ute [1].
Let me help you with that. They don't. If 1 in 50 1500 owners ever hook the thing up to anything heavier than a utility trailer (these can cheerfully be towed by a VW golf) I'll kiss your ass. They're also bullshit for hauling materials since a big chunk of the cargo space got eaten by the now pervasive luxury full sized back seat. The following is an abridged list of tells that a truck owner would be better off with a station wagon:
- the wheel wells are clean
- it's got a tonneau cover on
- no hitch receiver, it's empty, or there's no rust on the ball
- no dents, major scratches, or foreign materials on the bed or tailgate
Full disclosure: I have a Dodge 1500 in the driveway right now. In my defense the used truck market is fucking insane, I got this basically new for 60% of what a thoroughly used mid-sized truck would have cost me, and I actually do construction and timber work so the thing gets worked.
Back in Sacramento I saw a 1500 with a decal of mud on their shiny spotless truck. They went out of their way to announce how useless the vehicle actually was.
Mine is also used to haul a bed full of gravel when my drive needs repair or dirt for lawn correction. Not to mention I have a family.
Rear facing child seats while being 6 feet tall. Most cars I've tested don't support this. (Prius) Or no children can sit behind me because my front seat is sitting so close to the back seat that legs don't fit between. (Camero/Mustang)
Camry and Pasat seem to work, but warranties wouldn't cover things like bad child safety locks.... Not to mention, you can't haul things like gravel. =/
How frequently does your driveway need new gravel that you are justifying a vehicle for that purpose? Do you transport gravel more frequently for your driveway than your children?
You go from full truck down to flat cars, completely ignoring the vehicles in between like soft-roader SUVS or the venerable minivan. Does none of these vehicles meet your people carrying needs?
We have an SUV also and that does pretty well for children and shopping. We need 2 vehicles as jobs are different directions and I bought the most fuel efficient small truck (colorado) on the market at the time of purchase (which is more fuel efficient that the SUV we have, by 2-10 MPG).
The gravel isn't for the driveway, but the road. However, we have hauled gravel for flower beds. It's about time to replace fence and some wood around the garage.
No, I don't haul daily or monthly, but more like quarterly and as-needed. (Tillers, Lawn mowers for example)
I went down a similar path where I considered getting a pickup for hauling the occasional project material around. I ended up with a hatchback that covers 90% of use cases. The other 10% I can just rent a truck for a few hours to cover.
People pay double (or more) for gas every year so they can drive around an empty bed and maybe save $50 on a rental once a year.
The reality is that many people with a Ram are towing toys (boats, ATVs, etc) or, as you say, a travel trailer, not a work trailer. Which brings us to the question of need vs want.
Plus, if work vehicles became lighter, work trailers would be forced to as well.
> Plus, if work vehicles became lighter, work trailers would be forced to as well.
Try shopping for utility trailers. Anything affordable is very heavy steel & lumber. You can get light(er) trailers in aluminum but the price is much higher. I've never actually seen a contractor with one of those, too expensive.
And of course there is all the materials & equipment they're towing on it for the job. How do you suggest any of that become lighter?
> Well depends what you need to do with, of course.
given your example it's "want", not "need"
> 3300lb is very little, even our tiny (19ft) and light travel trailer is over 4000lb
Quick googling tells me that most European caravans are sub 1500kg / 3300lb, even the more spacious ones, "very little" and "tiny" are really subjective
San Francisco owes its growth as a city to the fact that the Bay provides a connection between the Sierras (and their goldfields) and the Pacific Ocean.
Regarding Boston, the interesting thing is that it used to be connected to the Merrimack via the Middlesex Canal. My understanding is that this is silted up now (which you presumably already know) but it shows how many more connections we used to have.
I've watched this being built and it's been really cool seeing how well SolidJS works. I was initially dubious ("No one gets fired for picking React", right?) but it seems like it made for really easy development.
How hard would it be to add a choropleth view showing metrics such as 1-year 24-hour depth across the globe?
It can't be represented in TypeScript type system.
You can't create utility type to have it.
Have a look at Flow docs [0] if you want to learn more.
His utility type works on diff between two provided types, this is something else.
Exact object type is a kind of type which doesn't allow extra, undeclared properties to be used for it to be satisfied.
You can't emulate it if it's not supported by type system.
The whole thing is implemented way better in Flow than TypeScript, ie. spreads map to how runtime treats them, this is also not something TypeScript can represent and Flow supports.
Also opaque types have first class support and many other things.
This was written by Alon Levy, who is deep in the weeds of transport infrastructure and was writing for a technical audience. The habitual readers of their blog will easily interpret this as "Why commuters prefer transfers at the origin rather than transfers at the destination". This is the same conclusion that will be reached by readers who have never read Alon's blog before but do in fact read the first sentence of the post.
Clearly, Alon's title uses wonkish terminology and would have benefited from a title that was more easily understood by people unfamiliar with the field. I think it's fair to say that you're not the target audience.
I recently changed jobs in Melbourne (senior frontend developer). I was told by multiple different people that the average market salary has dropped by about 5-10k since this time last year, but I didn't struggle to get interviews and I was able to accept an offer for what was apparently last year's market salary. Some of the larger companies weren't hiring but in general the market seemed pretty steady.
During the pandemic I was regularly seeing $170k AUD ($116k usd) + super (10% pension contributions) + equity if available, fully remote or 1-2 days a week in the office for senior/staff/principal roles.
I’m now not actively looking but when I’ve had a quick browse on LinkedIn I’m seeing similar jobs now advertised at $140-150k. All now marked as “Hybrid” or must be in the office, remote has backtracked massively. Looking at the Hybrid definition a lot say 3-4 days in the office.
For senior / staff / principal roles I won’t look at them if less than $170k which is still a huge pay cut on my current role, admittedly I got lucky with.
#/media/File:1990-1997_Toyota_Hilux_(LN106R)_DX_4-door_utility_(2007-09-28).jpg){kind=link}
reply