As do I, I personally have never heard someone refer to a nuclear fission power plant as a nuke, but I guess I don't hang around with the same people as you...
I agree with this - I was making the point that austerity, by the terms of its own argument, hasn't worked. Reducing public spending has demonstrably not reduced our debt burden even before the pandemic, and so therefore I would suggest we abandon it.
I'm genuinely curious to the reasoning behind austerity - I confess to not having any academic qualifications in economics but it does seem to me that deliberately removing services from the poorer sections of society is going to introduce more friction to the system, which will lead to poorer outcomes in general. The fact that our public debt continued to soar, even before the pandemic, seems to me to suggest that even on its own terms it wasn't a winning argument.
Do you have any sources that make the argument for austerity? This is a genuine question - as I say I have no formal background in the subject but from what I've managed to find I have found little in the way of convinvcing arguments.
They actually have already - PyTorch works straight up with ROCm, and so does Tensorflow. There is a little faffing to do to get it to work but they've made great progress in the last six months.
No sure, just you have strongly dismissive opinions of someone you mockingly refer to as a mere blog author, and I felt I had to weigh in. I confess I definitely don't know nearly as much as I'd like about the ancient world, especially not to the extent of having read the primary sources but I feel like you're missing the point of people's reactions.
I think the underlying point is that you actually can learn more about the ancient world despite not necessarily possesing any more primary source knowledge - things can be inferred, close analysis can change perspectives and so on.
I know it isn't the point you're trying to make but you sound like you're trying to dismiss the entire premise of historical research. Like, we don't have any new information (which is patently false by the way, maybe not so relevant to this particular topic but new information comes to light pretty much daily) so therefore we should simply not think about it anymore. I'm not trying to be dismissive of your argument and you clearly feel quite strongly about it.
Do you think all historical research is bunk or just this argument?
To this particular point, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spartiate would seem to suggest (admittedly poorly cited) that there was in fact a distinction made within Spartan society between free and enslaved Spartans.
The only reference it sources is confusingly Xenophon, who you have admonished others for not reading - I confess I haven't myself, so will do some digging!
Herodotus made a hell of a lot up, relied on oral reports and explicitly states that none of what he writes is intended to be relied on - it is merely what people told him. I think you actually need to read the linked blog that you seem so dismissive of, and come up with some substantive rebuttals to the points he makes rather than just making this rather lame appeal to historical authority.
Sorry but no it is selfish - that is the definition of selfish. 'It won't benefit me; it will benefit the whole of society but I don't give a shit about them so I'm not going to' is the most selfish viewpoint you can have.
I could understand if there was a significant risk of negative consequences to the individual but there aren't.
Which I recall being touted as one of the major advantages of systemd - specifically that binary log files would make for much easier log aggregation as it would be more efficient to send over the wire. Fast forward to today and the best way of shipping logs is to force journald to output to, uh, text, then wring it through, yes thats right, syslog, to then be sent to a central server...
"In the long term this will lead to novel types of assets, and make ownership extremely liquid. Imagine using your phone to buy shares in a recording artist you just discovered, and selling those shares when they win a grammy."
I'm sorry but I really totally fail to see what is appealing about this future hellscape where literally every aspect of our lives is transacted, monetised and profitable.
What is good about this? Why is this something to aim for?
Oh no, I fully agree with you - in a normal organisation that respects operating according to the burden of responsibility placed on it, reporting these things would be a duty. As things stand, it is seen as betrayal of the 'brotherhood' which is why it needs to be brought down.
"University-educated people in my social circle are often woefully unaware of economic trends that have swept the US, be it the gig economy, X-as-a-service, the nature of Venture Capital, the idea of scaling a company aggressively, the value of information, mobility of labor and paying market rate for experts, the high profit margins of offering a software product vs. (for example) doing one-off consulting for a German industrial company, etc."
I know you caveat all this with the fact that we aren't necessarily worse off (I say we but am British - I will always think of myself as European though) but I would argue that the fact the Europe has been behind the curve on any of these "innovations" is because society is less obsessed with the quick buck and that this is good.
None of these financial/technological innovations have provably made life better for anyone apart from VC's and founders, though I am willing to entertain counterpoints.
This, exactly this - I remember one of the most bandied about reasons for the binary log format was that it made replication over the network easier, or something.
Fast forward 10 years and I still cannot find a reliable way to do this with journald, apart from forcing it to output to syslogd and then shipping the syslog logs.
I would refer you to New Zealand which has, last time I checked, had one infection and zero fatalities. Sure this is not "preventing any infections" but I would argue that the rounding error on this is sufficient to make the claim that some governments have reacted well and the United States government has not. Of course NZ has several advantages geographically, but they also have a competent government that was willing to take proactive action.