That makes sense for the "utilities" bucket, and to a small degree for the health insurance bucket, which are the biggest buckets linked.
Utilities have had complete regulatory capture of most states' Public Utilities Commissions. It's blatant and obvious in places like Arizona that have open corruption in their elections and commission decisions. But in places like California it's far more hidden: the massive increase in cost of utilities is mostly from increased costs for the transmission and distribution grid, but CPUC has basically zero information for the public to understand why they keep on handing over more money to the big utilities. There definitely seems to be massive corruption but where is it and what is the actual mechanism? It's so well hidden and sophisticated that if there is corruption nobody understands what the F is going on.
How do you replace a state-sponsored monopoly like a utility into something competitive? I don't know, when I learned econ 101 utilities were given as the example of a "natural" monopoly. But clearly that's not working out... maybe it just needs to be "state" rather than "state sponsored monopoly." The only other state sponsored monopoly we really have is the state itself. What does the public gain by allowing monopoly utilities that giving away the public's money to investors? The incentives are all off.
The problem with the health insurance bucket is not the number of players, it's that you're buying a pig in a poke.
Between ghost networks, death panels that deny you treatment, and the nature of deductibles, you have no fucking idea what you're buying, and whether or not you're getting ripped off.
Yeah I've heard this my whole career, and while it sounds great it's been long enough that we'd be able to list some major examples by now.
What are the real world chances that a) one's compiled code benefits strongly from runtime data flow analysis AND b) no one did that analysis at the compilation stage?
Some sort of crazy off label use is the only situation I think qualifies and that's not enough.
Compiled Lua vs LuaJIT is a major example imho, but maybe it's not especially pertinent given the looseness of the Lua language. I do think it demonstrates that the concept that it is possible to have a tighter type-system at runtime than at compile time (that can in turn result in real performant benefits) is a sound concept, however.
The major Javascript engines already have the concept of a type system that applies at runtime. Their JITs will learn the 'shapes' of objects that commonly go through hot-path functions and will JIT against those with appropriate bailout paths to slower dynamic implementations in case a value with an unexpected 'shape' ends up being used instead.
There's a lot of lore you pick up with Javascript when you start getting into serious optimization with it; and one of the first things you learn in that area is to avoid changing the shapes of your objects because it invalidates JIT assumptions and results in your code running slower -- even though it's 100% valid Javascript.
Totally agree on js, but it doesn't have the same easy same-language comparison that you get from compiled Lua vs LuaJIT. Although I suppose you could pre-compile JavaScript to a binary with eg QuickJS but I don't think this is as apples-to-apples comparison as compiled Lua to LuaJIT.
That would make it discontinuous, which means there's no information beyond the integer.
I think, though I don't know how I'd prove, that anyone truly used to an analogue wristwatch probably only looks at the hour hand when casually checking.
I disagree with this. I read analogue clocks without having to do any conscious mental effort, but the minute hand is definitely a part of it.
If I have to think about how I parse them, I think the minute hand is more important than the hour hand. I'm usually roughly aware of what hour it is, and if I'm looking at a clock, it's to know what minute it is.
IDK, not having to worry about wifi, about if the ISP bill was paid, if the signal reaches their room, if they can do their school work while away from home, at a grandparents, etc. etc. Seems like an expensive but worthwhile call.
This is just plain corruption and the government officials were paid off. The parents of students should have been given the option to request the devices if needed and that would have been 1000x cheaper.
I think the students who have internet trouble at home may not always be in a situation where their parents are voluntarily going to the school to request these devices.
I find this comment amusing. How is this different than any non-means tested benefit? Or would the same criticism apply? (fwiw I think this money could have been spent better elsewhere).
systemd-networkd now implements a resolve hook for its internal DHCP
server, so that the hostnames tracked in DHCP leases can be resolved
locally. This is now enabled by default for the DHCP server running
on the host side of local systemd-nspawn or systemd-vmspawn networks.
