Lazare

47 ms·

361.
by Lazare 6y ago
The linked article suggests that their system will yield "competitive" yields and higher profits. I interpret that as "yes, just stop paying for fertiliser, do something else that's much cheaper than fertiliser, and get
362.
by Lazare 6y ago
First, humans don't generate enough waste to fertilise the crops they need to survive; that's why the Haber-Bosch process was so incredibly revolutionary. Sure, nitrogen fixing crops are a thing; crop rotation, there's a lot
363.
by Lazare 6y ago
> soil depletion, which recent research shows is a huge factor for climate change Soil depletion is neither created by industrial agriculture, nor solved by small scale agriculture. If you grow a bunch of wheat, it leaches nitrogen out o
364.
by Lazare 6y ago
> Industrialized farming is only so efficient because we sacrifice everything from ecological sustainability to taste to get that efficiency. Agreed. That's a point I touched on with my comment about industrial farming being, if any
365.
by Lazare 6y ago
> I got hooked on growing food for my family and me. It is really magical if you think of how much you spare our planet with growing your own food: You need to get a job to make money so that you can spend that money on buying food which
366.
by Lazare 6y ago
It's actually a reallllly bizarre case. What seems to have happened is: First, Texaco and Gulf oil started to develop the Lagro Agrio fields in 1964. In 1972 they started production. In 1974, the Ecuadorian government obtained a 25%
367.
by Lazare 6y ago
You have no idea what you're talking about. The problem here is we've stopped the natural fires, and thus caused damage; what's being discussed is returning to something closer to natural. Misguided, fact-free views like yo
368.
by Lazare 6y ago
> Isn't this generally highjacked by the timber industry to protect valuable "product?" At least in some cases, the main restriction is environmental protections laws and liability concerns. You want to start a controlled
369.
by Lazare 6y ago
I've used MST on a project and it was everything I'd hoped. Obviously one project isn't a lot of data, but I'd certainly use it again if another opportunity arose.
370.
by Lazare 6y ago
My experience has been the reverse. I've found MobX code easier to maintain than equivalent Redux code, and although it's obviously subjective, I feel it is a good fit for the React model. Just noting that experiences may differ s
371.
by Lazare 6y ago
Right, your initial post said: > ULIDs are sortable (time component), short (26 chars) and nearly human readable, and good enough entropy/randomness for everything I'd ever be working on. 1) Being roughly sortable is a valuable
372.
by Lazare 6y ago
> ULID tries to guarantee monotonicity with any single generator, which is nice if you need it and irrelevant if you don't The thing is, you don't need it. Nobody needs it. And I know this is mean, but...if you think people n
373.
by Lazare 6y ago
Yeah. ULID will work . It's just that there's a lot of small annoyances and quirks, and no real advantages. If you've already adopted it, it's probably not worth changing, but I can't think why you'd select i
374.
by Lazare 6y ago
KSUIDs are slightly longer, base62 encoded, have a different epoch, have second precision in the timestamp component, have a different length random component, and omitted the bizarre attempt in the ULID spec to enforce strict monotonicity.
375.
by Lazare 6y ago
One reason is database indexes. If you shove truly random data into a standard B-tree (or whatever), performance tends to suck. If the start of the key lets you roughly sort by time, performance improves. It's not super uncommon for
376.
by Lazare 6y ago
The concept of ULID is interesting, but the spec is a bit weird[1]. If you want the benefits of ULID, I'd highly suggest checking out KSUIDs: https://github.com/segmentio/ksuid https://segment.com/
377.
by Lazare 6y ago
We're still building coal power plants right now . See, eg, "Japan Races to Build New Coal-Burning Power Plants" from Feb of this year ( https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/03/climate/japan-coa
378.
by Lazare 6y ago
> My girlfriends oldest brother died in what was a wave of cancer infant deaths [..] That's horrible, and I don't want to diminish it in any way. Nuclear power has killed many people, and impacted many more others negatively. T
379.
by Lazare 6y ago
> As long as the extrapolations for nuclear are prone to extreme outcomes The extrapolations for coal are prone to very extreme outcomes, believe me. :-) > nuclear is more unpredictable Citation needed, I think. The impact of coal
380.
by Lazare 6y ago
Obviously zero deaths is a great target, yes. Obviously zero deaths is impossible. No energy production method causes zero deaths; even wind and solar have a death toll (eg, from workers falling off things, construction accidents, manufactu
381.
by Lazare 6y ago
Do we stress about the risks nuclear power far out of proportion to how safe it is? Yes. Even accounting for the worst accidents, it kills a very low number of people per TWh. Do we ignore the risks of fossil fuels far out of proportion to
382.
by Lazare 6y ago
Dextroamphetamine is a common first line treatment for ADHD, but methamphetamine is a second line treatment. A lot of the information about methamphetamine is, bluntly, propaganda. For example, there seems to be nothing about methamphetamin
383.
by Lazare 6y ago
I've recently started reading through the archives on the blog. His writing style took me a little getting used to (he's oddly fond of italics), but I think it's really an attempt at transcribing what might otherwise be a lec
384.
by Lazare 6y ago
> 1% of commercial reactors Have failed catastrophically. That seems a bit high to me. There have been a lot of commercial reactors. > Seems like terrible track record. Even if true, everything fails sometimes. Rooftop solar has a s
385.
by Lazare 6y ago
Eh. In my view, nuclear is very clearly safe enough, and has been for some time. What's more interesting to me is whether it's cheap enough.
386.
by Lazare 6y ago
I mean, your car probably has a lead acid battery in it. Like uranium, lead is a toxic heavy metal, and it needs to be kept safe; it'll be as toxic in ten thousand years as it is now, and you should definitely avoid getting it in your
387.
by Lazare 6y ago
Joplin is an open source note taking tool. You can make notebooks, full of notes. It supports markdown, has a decent UI, supports a bunch of nifty markdown plugins, has search, and is just generally decent. Notably it has native (and good)
388.
by Lazare 6y ago
I used Notion for a while, but found the UI just a little tpp sluggish. And I personally value native apps for tools like this, and Notion's Electron based apps were quite large and slow, sadly. I love what they're doing, I unde
389.
by Lazare 6y ago
https://joplinapp.org/ is a very nice tool in this space as well. Open source, lots of features.
390.
by Lazare 6y ago
> While in theory I am in strong support of new financing models to bring new technologies to market(ex. these Special Purpose Acquisition Companies - SPACs) I am very concerned that if even a portion of the alleged is true, this could p

More ›