chroem-

6 ms·

1.
by chroem- 4y ago
No thank you: I don't care for content that's searching for evidence to support a preconcieved position. There is too much dogma and not enough pragmatism in this space. I already get enough of their content on HN to recognize do
2.
by chroem- 4y ago
> That being said, _requiring_ cars and _allowing_ them are very different things. Being anti-bulldozing city blocks to put in 6-lane highways isn't anti-car, it's pro people! That's a semantic argument that doesn't a
3.
by chroem- 4y ago
You can't conduct commerce on a bike. Anti-car policies are also closely coupled with inflated housing prices, since they effectively reduce the available housing supply by requiring employees to commute from within public transit dis
4.
by chroem- 4y ago
Does the California power grid still need to perform load shedding during peak usage, or have they added additional capacity?
5.
by chroem- 4y ago
So is the argument that the article is trying to make that there's nothing wrong with the current state of affairs?
6.
by chroem- 4y ago
Are you able to achieve a 10000x efficiency improvement vs natural photosynthesis by using those technologies? If not, the idea is still completely unfeasible.
7.
by chroem- 4y ago
US farmland occupies 895 million acres (3.6M km^2) [1]. Average solar irradiance on most US farmland is about 200 W/m^2 [2]. By being generous and assuming vertical farming is 100x more efficient than natural photosynthesis, the energ
8.
by chroem- 4y ago
Yeah, just burn terawatts of fossil fuels to generate light for growing your crops instead of using solar energy and natural photosynthesis.
9.
by chroem- 4y ago
If you choose to ignore the example I just gave, that's on you, but luckily I can provide additional examples from the last few years: - bans on legal ownership of certain types of firearms while simultaneously weakening firearms penal
10.
by chroem- 4y ago
Punishment is in the eye of the beholder: the left and right don't care about the same issues, and that's the principle that makes it possible to hurt your opponent through lawfare without hurting yourself. Eliminating federal pr
11.
by chroem- 4y ago
The premise of lawfare is that you enact laws and legal precedents primarily with intent of undermining your opponent, rather than to benefit anyone in particular. The American right just realized that they can do this too.
12.
by chroem- 4y ago
Or perhaps the takeaway should be that lawfare can invite more lawfare.
13.
by chroem- 4y ago
Those legally gray firearms databases were not a good precedent.
14.
by chroem- 4y ago
Energy input in the form of compressor work. It's not even remotely similar to Maxwell's Demon.
15.
by chroem- 4y ago
You know, somehow I just have a hard time getting behind the most numerically murderous ideology in the history of the planet. Communist periodicals have just as much business being on HN as their nazi counterparts: none .
16.
by chroem- 4y ago
Don't be so dismissive: it's a legitimate concern. These are the same western governments that are already trying to clamp down on internet content they don't like: e.g. pornography, encryption, etc.
17.
by chroem- 4y ago
> learn a voxel grid representation But isn't that what photogrammetry does?
18.
by chroem- 4y ago
What's the difference from regular photogrammetry?
19.
by chroem- 4y ago
> they wield immense power to set the narrative that essentially drives democracy What you're describing has a name and it isn't democracy: it's oligarchy.
20.
by chroem- 4y ago
Look at how inefficient and harmful for the environment software has become. Devs and corporations are throwing away CPU cycles like it's no big deal when they use large, overly abstracted software tech stacks. You don't need
21.
by chroem- 4y ago
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200218-climate-change-h... https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/28/business/energy-environme... https://davidsuzuki.org/living-g
22.
by chroem- 4y ago
Airliners account for 2.5% of global CO2 emissions [1], yet we are working to ban passenger air travel to protect the climate. 5-9% is huge in comparison, and we should legislate restrictions on wasteful computing before the climate emerge
23.
by chroem- 4y ago
Statistically speaking, in the United States you are more likely to be struck by lightning than you are to die in a school shooting. The vast majority of gun violence is drug and gang related, however since 2020 progressive jurisdictions h
24.
by chroem- 4y ago
And yet the technology was reserved exclusively for the Soviet political elite and never saw use with regular citizens.
25.
by chroem- 4y ago
AWS was able to increase my quota after escalating. GCP was not.
26.
by chroem- 4y ago
If I could offer a word of advice: Be less quick to "fact check" anything that disagrees with the conventional wisdom.
27.
by chroem- 4y ago
No, it was extremely bizarre. They gave the option of escalating to sales, which I did, but all they did was deny my use case again for a lack of business justification. I think they're trying to prevent people from cryptomining, so
28.
by chroem- 4y ago
Why are you so eager to dismiss this as FUD? Are you a google employee? Here are the screenshots of the response I received. https://imgur.com/a/K66bX6W
29.
by chroem- 4y ago
Yes, you do. I went through this exact process in Fall 2021. I invite you to attempt to set up a personal GCP account for hobby use in the current GPU shortage, and share your experience.
30.
by chroem- 4y ago
By default, Google will not allow you to access GPU instances on regular GCP. The GPU quota is initialized to zero and you have to open a support ticket in order to request GPU access, justifying why your use case deserves access. Evident

More ›