tchaffee

41 ms·

481.
by tchaffee 4y ago
> The Great Depression was not a deliberate purge, markets follow boom and bust cycles. Right. You're doing exactly what I pointed out before: making excuses for US economic policy when it fails but giving it the credit when it succ
482.
by tchaffee 4y ago
If you want to blame them for the bad you need to give them credit for recent accomplishments. Unless you think it's a line that Americans sunk themselves in The Great Depression and therefore American leaders should get no credit for
483.
by tchaffee 4y ago
How so? They are now the most valuable company in human history. I guess if you're saying the marketing doesn't appeal to you personally that's fair. But it clearly has widespread appeal to others.
484.
by tchaffee 4y ago
> Why didn't they do so already. They did. The Chinese economy has pulled more people out of poverty in the past few decades than any economy in human history. By far. "In 1990 there were more than 750 million people in China
485.
by tchaffee 4y ago
The US has many poor states. Some of which have a lower quality of life than poor EU states.
486.
by tchaffee 4y ago
One person deciding where all that money is invested is a sort of economic dictator. Trying to live on Mars is polluting our planet. If you don't agree with that use of resources, it's not a benevolent dictatorship.
487.
by tchaffee 4y ago
It's both. A broken Google result page is a lost opportunity for ad revenue for Google.
488.
by tchaffee 4y ago
Simple doesn't mean overhyped or over used. Both 'ls' and 'cd' are simple to implement. The script is more of a tutorial than it is making fun of anything. You'd need to give better reasons for why Docker is ov
489.
by tchaffee 4y ago
> woke virtue signaling > tell your opponent you're better than them. You just did the latter. By assuming your opponents are not sincere in the former.
490.
by tchaffee 4y ago
No one claimed that solar panels produce the same output on cloudy days as sunny days. The claim was that solar panels have become efficient enough to not need sunny California type climate in order to be viable. Two very different claims.
491.
by tchaffee 4y ago
> Sorry, you don't get to count media hysteria as a "risk" of nuclear energy. It wasn't media hysteria. The evacuation was to protect people. On the seven-point International Nuclear Event Scale, it is rated Level 5.
492.
by tchaffee 4y ago
> The Soviet Union (and now Russia) is notorious for having crap technology. And Japan too? They had a major and recent disaster. How do you explain that? Crap Japanese technology? > Yes. We can. 70 years, no accidents. That's ab
493.
by tchaffee 4y ago
> There was no such claim. Anyone can read to the top of thread and see that you are wrong about what started the discussion. > Again, I think we are done here. Are you an airplane? You don't need to keep announcing your delayed
494.
by tchaffee 4y ago
> Expecting to love your work and have fun doing it, is incredibly naive, yes. Then I guess I've been naive for over three decades. And getting paid great for it too. I suppose I'll never learn this important lesson considering
495.
by tchaffee 4y ago
That's a laughable claim. https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list.php?vendor_id=... And just 10 days ago: Code security company SonarSource today published details on a severe vulnerability impacting Packagist,
496.
by tchaffee 4y ago
That's a horrible heuristic. All you are doing is selecting for engineers who have failed to fix the problem like you have failed. Misery loves company, eh? I have decades of experience, mostly work in JS, am often in the top 5% on Sta
497.
by tchaffee 4y ago
Thanks - that's the best explanation I've seen so far. > It's likely somewhere between 1,000 (several days of cloudy winter) How do you figure? Solar technology is moving so rapidly you can't even look at the efficien
498.
by tchaffee 4y ago
So you've cherry picked the data to fit your narrative. You're simultaneously claiming that the US can somehow safely build the tall and complex structures for a nuclear plant but cannot safely install solar panels on a 2 story bu
499.
by tchaffee 4y ago
> it just works without thinking or deleting node_modules directory every day That kind of hyperbole isn't useful. If you're deleting node_modules directory every day, you're doing something wrong. Perhaps due to lack of e
500.
by tchaffee 4y ago
> Why do people think they can "play with new technologies" at work The same reason software developer salaries are so high. Supply and demand. Companies will do back flips to attract and keep software engineering talent. &gt
501.
by tchaffee 4y ago
> it's clear that nuclear is extremely safe. It's clear that solar is extremely safe. And doesn't have a history in the US of evacuating over 150,000 people. Which nuclear does. > Plus it has the added benefit of, actu
502.
by tchaffee 4y ago
> You're saying that modern solar panels produce the same output on cloudy days that they do on sunny ones? Who said that? > At what cost per MWh, including government subsidies? No government subsidies. Westinghouse Electric dec
503.
by tchaffee 4y ago
It's not hope. Things have moved quickly. This discussion started with the false claim that solar needs sunny California type weather. Which was true in recent history. Now it does not need California type weather. Cleve Hill solar p
504.
by tchaffee 4y ago
Or according to the math in another comment, over 350k homes on long sunny summer days. Is it weasel language that the new nuclear towers in question here didn't include the 1 in ~200,000 documented chance of disaster due to earthquake
505.
by tchaffee 4y ago
They are better at performing in cloudy conditions compared to older technology. In the past, it was not viable to install solar panels in cloudy areas. With the higher efficiency panels of today and the drops in price, it's now viable
506.
by tchaffee 4y ago
So far zero people have given a source showing that the claim of powering 91,000 homes is an outrageous lie. Zero sources is "not close at all" to showing that the actual output is going to be so wildly different from what every s
507.
by tchaffee 4y ago
You were the one that was wrong. You have zero sources to support your false claims. I gave sources and quotes. I'm not the one getting flagged, downvoted, and my comments grayed out. Carry on.
508.
by tchaffee 4y ago
It isn't misleading.
509.
by tchaffee 4y ago
Sources lying to people is a bold claim that needs to be supported by evidence. Lacking that, folks should ignore claims like this.
510.
by tchaffee 4y ago
I read the source and you are wrong. Here is the official website and I quote: "This is a project that will generate up to 350MW of clean renewable electricity to power over 91,000 homes" https://www.clevehillsolar.co

More ›