How many people actual think like this or are influenced by it? (I'm going to be disappointed aren't I)

Nobody at all, but isn't it scary to imagine? In fact we could imagine and invent all kinds of scary things if we think too much. Ahh!

I know plenty of people personally who can rant about energy prices being high while somehow finding room in the same breath to demonize wind and solar energy and even namedrop whichever foul devil bogeyman it is this week that is said to be the cause of this disjointed trauma that they find so overwhelming.

In the next breath, they pick something else from the deck to be upset about: These days, that's usually brown people, emails, laptops, the American cities that people in frog costumes burn to the ground every night, brown people, guns, laptops, and Hillary.

Sometimes, they then take a break to hear themselves talk about baseball, praise the president for getting so much done that he doesn't even have time to sleep, or to complain about the plot from the episode of The Dukes of Hazard -- from 1983 -- that they watched for the 14th time last night on Pluto.

After the break, it's time for them to complain about how they can't afford visit a doctor or buy eyeglasses, but they sure as hell don't want them any of those librawls to take any of their hard-earned money so everyone can go to the doctor.

Then things shift back to being weirder again: Schools turning boys into girls, kids using litter boxes in the classroom, men wearing dresses, God's Perfect Plan, guns, brown people, groceries, brown people, and blue hair dye.

This tiresome process repeats until I manage to escape, or I tell them very pointedly to shut the fuck up (hints don't work).

None of the people I know who act this way seem to be particularly bright, but I know them anyway.

And they vote. (Yes, I've checked.)

I consider that I'm intertwined in the evolution of a very different friend's very local efforts, with their own hybrid battery-backed grid-tied offline-capable solar power system.

That rig is pretty sweet.

It pays for itself, and in present form and with their present use (wherein: they're not trying to live particularly-efficiently) it is almost entirely capable of keeping them with power even if the grid goes down for an indefinite period.

But, sure: We can talk about games, instead, if what you want to chat about is just games.

What games might you have in mind?

"entirely capable of keeping them with power even if the grid goes down for an indefinite period."

You do know that batteries have a capacity right? And powerplants have something called a capacity factor. That means for a given amount of capacity, you generate on average a certain amount of power. For nuclear that factor is .9. For renewables its .1. So 1 watt of nuclear provides the same power as 9 watts of renewables. That's why when you say that renewables have 1/3 the capacity cost, it really means its 3x more expensive than nuclear. That means higher bills for people, which is what we mean when we say utilization cost. That's the real cost that people pay and actually counts. And all this is before we talk about siting issues with renewables. Fun fact, most PV is sites (located) somewhere with an albino factor of less than .25. But since you connected a battery terminal to a PV panel, you must know what that means. Seriously, you are just spreading misinformation that transfers cost from the rich to the poor, such a hero you are.

I didn't say that renewables have 1/3 of anything.

And I'm a big fan of nuclear power. I, for one, am completely in favor of having as many nuclear power plants in my back yard as possible.

You seem to be having an argument with someone who is not present -- as if you have some unseen enemy.

This delusion has been noted.

There is nothing here for us to discuss.

Good day.

Most grown men are influenced by this. The patriachy is strongggg.

Just like you can manipulate women en-masse by appealing to patriarchal attitudes around femininity and beauty, maybe by talking about weight or hair, you can influence men by appealing to patriachal attitudes around masculinity.

I mean, you can convince the average American man to drop an extra 20K on a truck he doesn't need and a multiply his gas cost by 2x just by convincing him it's manly. You can discourage men from drinking cosmopolitans and instead have them drink the equivalent of cat piss by telling him it's unmanly.

Couldn't this also be solved with transmission from other parts of the country? or is that what you're saying?

Yes, but you have to pay for a line you don't plan to use much, so its capital costs should be attributed to the generation method requiring it. Which is fine, but not including it is dishonest about the true costs.

I think if you designed and built it with the idea in mind that you're building your renewables in the sunny/windy centre/south of the US to be transported to a these places all year round it's a better idea than it being a backup. But I agree that the cost of over generation should be factored in to comparison pricing. But I also think we don't include enough of the costs in FF infra either.

The coal plant in my hometown was always running on cold days. It didn't need anything else to be available when needed besides several hours of lead time.

Mostly relying on long-distance transmission has high costs in capex, opex (losses), reliability, and security.

That vastly depends on if we choose to go in the right direction.

You assume no civilizational collapse is in our future.

Tbh this reply works for pretty much anything anyone ever says

I was attempting a sarcastic jab at the whole "this is the worst AI will ever be". Yet tech (or anything really) will often hit a wall, and be about as good as it's ever going to get.

I have devs that do this and we have CI AI code review. Problem is, it always finds something. So the devs that have been in the code base for a while know what to ignore, the new devs get bogged down by research. It's a net benefit as it forces them to learn, which they should be doing. It def slows them down though which goes against some of what I see about the productivity boost claims. A human reviewer with the codebase experience is still needed.

Slowing down new developers by forcing them to understand the product and context better is a good thing.

I do agree that the tool we use (code rabbit) is a little too nitpicky, but it's right way more than it's wrong.

I don’t use any of these sorts of tools, so sorry for the naive questions…

What sort of thing does it find? Bad smells (possibly known imperfections but least-bad-picks), bugs (maybe triaged), or violations of the coding guides (maybe known and waivered)?

I wonder if there’s a need for something like a RAG of known issues…

GPT 5+ high+ review bots find consistently good issues on average for me, sometimes they’re bogus, but sometimes they’re really, really good finds. I was impressed more than once.

This response fails entirely to answer the question.

I thought the same. I'm still 90% of the same mindset. But it does worry me how much people like slop. But is it because it's novel? and will people get tired of it?

People like AI created slop because they already like human created slop. AI slop is the way it is because it was trained on human slop.

I didn't look at the product. But $240/year is nothing for an org. Plus not only just the time to make it. What about the time fixing bugs? hosting costs? backups? I'm sure there will be products that can be replaced (possibly this one), but I'm not convinced the death of SaaS is here yet.

I was looking for this comment (I was going to say the same) - I'm mostly on the backend services and infra side, and I have the option to host a lot of open-source tooling as opposed to paying for a service. I have to weigh up my options when deciding what to do, but a lot comes down to how much time I have and how much I'm willing to waste in time & hosting costs to keep the thing running. Also, do I need support, and ensure uptime and SLAs etc. Or what if I'm on holidays. I'm sure there are other things I'm not thinking of right now.

I don't think you can guarantee it will get better. I'm sure it will improve from here but by how much? Have the exponential gains topped out? Maybe it's a slow slog over many years that isn't that disruptive. Has there been any technology that hasn't hit some kind of wall?

Do you have any examples or are your project oss or anything like that? Because I want to believe, but I have people I work with that say and try the same thing (no manual coding), and their work is now terrible.

Ive finally fixed some massive issues in projects that were taking me literally years, Ill be super happy to share once they are ready ( I cant really show my trading app but the game should be fine as soon as I do).

Let's be real. Unless you're putting in the effort, the government already knows. Especially so on the sites listed in this ban.

To an extent I agree, except consider that governments of smaller countries probably don’t currently have the means to know, but they with such a system it would be served on a silver platter. Additionally, it could be leveraged as a means of censorship system restricting access to undesirable content