It's called Bloom. A really pretty way to shape a visual aesthetic with a client. Our users (& founders) are in things like fashion photography and video production.
To memory, cars started getting a lot more aerodynamic through the 90s. You have to go back to the 80s to find boxy designs throughout mainstream cars, at which point you’re looking at vehicles somewhere in the ballpark of 40 years old.
Anecdotally, I’ve not seen many of those on the road. It’s not too unusual to see a late 90s something puttering around town, but 80s and older is unusual, even in rural areas.
I drive a car that was released 25 years ago (a 7th-gen Celica) and it has a coefficient of drag of 0.32, which beats many vehicles currently in production, including multiple electric vehicles.
It's a biological and societal reality. While we may end up solving the immediate demographic crisis through technology (e.g. Optimus for the elderly), the future of humanity depends on raising children. Not taxing the rich, personal convenience, or trivializing my stated position as one that is "easy" to have.
Of all the public online communities, you'd think HN would be capable of calling it the way it is. But I'm afraid it's been overrun by brainwashed ideologues as I've seen many times the truth being downvoted into oblivion during my short time here. Maybe we should do an experiment and make an account that only posts Paul Graham's positions and see how often it gets downvoted. I suspect the culture has shifted quite a lot since HN's founding and a decent chunk on the margin no longer cares about what's true over what's acceptable.
Got laid off 2 weeks ago (8YOE). How are there so many engineers out of work for >2 years? Should I conclude that my time is better spent searching for a non-eng job?
YMMV. See what 2-3 months of job searching does for you, then investigate rewarding alternatives so you have the beginning of a plan B. If your main area of expertise is Go or TS, fullstack, React, AI, don't wait 2-3 months as the supply/demand is greatly titled.
There are rural land loan companies. Or buy with friends or family. I know people who've done the above and don't tell anybody but it's working out fine.
> The point is to not owe people money so that you are self sufficient and not need to make money.
Trouble is, if you become self-sufficient the government will soon swoop in and try to take a piece of the pie, and now you're back to owing people money again.
The ideal is to owe so much money that you become "too big to fail". Then you get all the benefits of being self-sufficient, but with nothing on paper to share.
there's a difference between rendering unto Caesar what is Caesar's vs owing a bank for a mortgage, owing a utility company for power/water, paying for 100% of your food.
sure, there's no getting around taxes, but today, there's no getting around having some sort of service provider. you can't DIY your way into a fibre network and/or cell service. at least not legitimately.
Aren't you going to pay for food no matter what? You can pay for it indirectly by trading your time with someone else who has put in time to produce it (the way most people pay for food), or you can put your time directly into the food (how self-sufficiency would pay for it), but either way the time will be spent. There is, quite literally in this case, no free lunch.
> you can't DIY your way into a fibre network and/or cell service.
Do you need these anyway? They are arguably necessary services for participating in a modern society, but if you are self-sufficient that implies a disconnect from society.
You are trying to theorize it too much. There’s a big difference between growing part of your own food and buying it. Also there’s a big difference between wanting to rely less on anonymous service providers and not wanting to communicate with anyone.
> There’s a big difference between growing part of your own food and buying it.
Because if you grow your own food you have to worry about storage? You are right that, while not impossible to overcome – our ancestors managed, is not the easiest problem to deal with. Especially if you like variety in your diet.
That's why I, a farmer, don't (knowingly) eat the food I grow. It is a lot easier to exchange the food for an IOU. Then, later, when I'm hungry, I can return the IOU for food. Someone who specializes in food storage can do a much better job than I can. Let them deal with it. My expertise is in growing the food.
What is even the point of growing part of your own food? I'd at least have some understanding of being fully reliant on your own food if you fear a zombie apocalypse or something, but if you remain dependent on others anyway, what have you gained? If it is that you enjoy the process of growing food like I do, you may as well become a farmer and sell the product.
I actually want to do everything you're outlining as well, but here in the northeast they're trying to sell ~1 acre for > $100,000 in a lot of desirable "rural" towns. Definitely makes it harder to get into unless you want to commit to far far north.
I've been watching a lot of TV shows that have revealed a lot of pros/cons about different areas of the country. The further north means a much shorter growing season which makes a greenhouse even more important. It also means a lot more infrastructure is required to keep any livestock alive during the longer winters. Places like Texas goes the other direction where the heat during the long summers is brutal, but it means early spring and late fall crops. I really wouldn't want to be any further north than 40°.
Got to find that perfect plot of land that has water, some trees for wood, some land that can be farmed and hopefully a clear sky to the south for solar. Oh, and it's gonna need to be far enough from a city so my telescope can finally be used the way it was meant.
https://bloom.site
reply