pif

46 ms·

691.
by pif 4y ago
> Technology has reached this point a long time ago. Your sources and mine must differ. As far as I know, renewable energy sources cannot yet guarantee a steady energy flow, to source big industry, when it's cloudy and not windy for
692.
by pif 4y ago
Sure, now it may. But 50 years ago? No way!
693.
by pif 4y ago
On this point, I agree with you. We were too scared to talk rationally about nuclear, and we chose to burn coal instead.
694.
by pif 4y ago
> About 1-2% of GDP In economic terms, 1-2% of GDP is the difference between a year worth celebrating and a shitty one. OK, I exaggerated a bit, but it is absolutely not negligible over a couple of years, and a catastrophe over 50 years.
695.
by pif 4y ago
> Ask people who live in LA if they preferred the smog from the 1970s, or the people of Cleveland if they prefered the burning river. If I ask the people who lost their manufacturing job to China, what do you expect as an average answer?
696.
by pif 4y ago
> A slow train wreck that was avoidable. Avoidable? Yes, but for which price? Our economy, and thus wellbeing, depend on having huge quantities of cheap energy available. You think pollution is bad? Ask the hundreds of million of people
697.
by pif 4y ago
No, it means they will not hire 5 k people they had planned to hire, and they'll let 10 k people go within their current workforce.
698.
by pif 4y ago
This, 1000 times! Let's stop pretending we can reverse history, and let's use knowledge and science to adapt preventively to the changes we can foresee.
699.
by pif 4y ago
I think it's time to reverse the equation: jobs have to be available where housing is! In other words, we must learn how to improve the economy without turning the cities into antlers.
700.
by pif 4y ago
> It's really surprising how often the “quick” approach turns out to be slower than the “right” approach. And it's really surprising how few people realise that, even if the "quick" approach is slower in the long term
701.
by pif 4y ago
> Developers find poor quality code significantly slows them down within a few weeks. By the way, I'd like to know which kind of software those "skilled" developers are used to work on. If it is the umpteenth CRUD web appl
702.
by pif 4y ago
There are hacks like "everything in a huge global object", and technical debts like "no unit tests for internal detail and no detailed software structure documentation until we know which code is actually worth to maintain&qu
703.
by pif 4y ago
> getting everyone to frequently think about deadline/feature trade-offs I never let anyone else impose a deadline and a list of features on my schedule. If the features are mandatory, I will provide the deadline. If the deadline
704.
by pif 4y ago
> Stop the cult of "build faster with tech debt" -- internal quality matters and costs you velocity. Well, internal quality costs, and the price is expressed in time. As someone else said: "shipping is a feature", and
705.
by pif 4y ago
The most usual situation, in my experience, is that a team is required to hit a date that someone else committed to.
706.
by pif 4y ago
1000 tons = 10^9 grams
707.
by pif 4y ago
Your comment is spot on, and the line you wrote summarizes perfectly the article. If you are wondering about the downvotes, it's because HN'ers hate when you state the truth about the world being larger than the web startups micro
708.
by pif 4y ago
It's the obvious choice when a great deal of your wealth comes from helping foreigners bypass their tax laws.
709.
by pif 4y ago
No! You get yourself started, and you keep going. Motivation is fine if it happens, otherwise you do without.
710.
by pif 4y ago
In other words, you need to grow up.
711.
by pif 4y ago
Sure, I like driving to places, too, but having more trains would not hinder your journey by car.
712.
by pif 4y ago
I think I see your point, but let me please interject that your proposal contains itself some hostility. > which solutions are really helpful in reducing CO2. There, you have already decided that lowering the amount of CO2 should be our
713.
by pif 4y ago
> We really need to get away from solutions that involve ... Halt! Propose a working alternative first, we'll talk about banning later.
714.
by pif 4y ago
> "Keeping extra inventory is a waste of money." But he is right! Extra inventory has a cost. Each cost increases the final price. And the customers, they don't buy from you because you have extra inventory in case of a gl
715.
by pif 4y ago
> why is it still not economical? Entropy and energy. - Entropy: dispersing is easy, collecting is hard. - Energy: burning releases energy, putting it back together requires energy.
716.
by pif 4y ago
> oil is subsidized when it should be taxed. Our economy is based on oil. What you are proposing is an immediate economic collapse of whatever country decides to go that way.
717.
by pif 4y ago
> Let us hope that the current period of revolution is coming to an end. Let us hope that the current need of revolution is coming to an end. FTFY
718.
by pif 4y ago
Calling 40 years ago “history” is actually “disdain for history”. History is not what you can find at an older cousin's place. History is what someone had to make an effort to save for you, and you cannot experience it any more.
719.
by pif 4y ago
If you buy drugs for which you need to hide from your democratic government, then you are not normal people: you are a criminal. Good riddance!
720.
by pif 4y ago
I'm not sure I ever got on such a website! They usually ask you to disable ad-blockers in order to accept ads, but they cannot force you to accept personalized ads.

More ›