I like LLM stuff sometimes. But it's too obnoxious, over-eager, loud and incorrect by default. I wish it were modal and I could have an entirely AI-free "normal" mode for when I know what I'm doing, and then enable all the AI crap when I actually want it.
Sizes tend to be a lot smaller. One poster above said a large soda in the USA is almost one litre! In the UK it's roughly half that size at 500ml.
As the sugar level is directly proportionate to the overall volume, it can be quite surprising how much sugar there is when you aren't used to such massive servings.
> One poster above said a large soda in the USA is almost one litre!
There are two sizes of single-serving sodas sold commercially in the US.
A small one, a can, is 12 oz, 355 mL.
A large one is 20 oz, 591 mL.
To buy a 32-ounce soda, you'd have to do something very strange.
(There is another common commercial size, the two liter bottle of exactly 2000 mL. Those aren't intended to be bought and drunk; they're intended to be bought, taken home, and stored in your refrigerator over time.)
A gas station? No, they'd be selling prepackaged sodas in the 20-oz size.
You might be able to do it at a 7-11, since they sell empty cups that you're meant to fill with a slurpee. I don't know if they also have soda fountains to fill those cups.
And when companies with limited liability are involved. Case in point the research reactor in Germany. The company that was responsible to dismantle it just declared insolvency.
The problem is in the fact that we have been treating more and more banal construction projects as if they were chemical factories.
The permiting process for a normal residential block of flats in Prague takes several years, because every NIMBY can have their say repeatedly.
Everything can be overdone and we as a civilization might have overdone it with safetyism. On a similar note, look at the "free range kid" movement, which is fighting hard to give children at least some freedom which, 40 years ago, was considered absolutely natural.
I think we're in agreement on that point. What I worry about is there's a line of reasoning in the US that there should be no permitting and zero code enforcement, and I think that's too far in the other direction. But I would like to see in the US a change to a model where you're not constrained to a Le Courbosier style development with residential, commercial, and industrial spaces situated in separate centers, because that's not a natural mode of development and it has created many ills here.
I suspect that I would feel the same as you do about flats in Prague.
The argument for codes and such is information asymmetry. The person selling you something may know corners were cut, but they don't tell you.
An argument against codes (and licensing) is they are one size fits all. Maybe someone with different preferences would trade off quality and price differently than you do. I think this especially shows up in licensing: a rich person wants their doctor to be extremely good, even if that greatly elevates the cost; a poor person would be better off at lesser quality medical care they could actually afford.
My favorite example of redundancy is the US requirement to have two staircases in an apartment block for the case of fire.
Most other developed nations do not mandate this, one staircase being considered enough. And they don't have an epidemics of fire deaths either. In general, frequency of fires in domestic settings is a fraction of those 100 years ago.
If Switzerland or Czechia can live with one staircase per building, so can the US. This alone would reduce costs of construction somewhat, and make some currently illegal construction projects legal.
>The problem is in the fact that we have been treating more and more banal construction projects as if they were chemical factories.
Add up all the people who benefit from this. The regulatory bureaucracy, the engineering firms, every tradesman who holds a license protecting him from market competition, etc, etc. That's a hell of a lot of people. So the racket goes on.
I was mainly responding to your parent, who did seem to be advocating for that. The reality is that we do need some light permissions to prevent some forms of harm.
Harms don't need to be undone, they just need to be penalized.
For example: statistical deaths can be compensated for by fines using the statistical value of a human life (about $12 M). Nuclear power regulation could be based on this principle.
Let's turn that around: how do you feel about extending the laws about murder to statistical deaths?
Because that would be completely impractical. It would cause the economy to cease functioning. Statistical deaths and individual murders are fundamentally different things.
There's a fuzzy boundary between the two (as effects are concentrated on smaller and smaller numbers of people) but that doesn't mean there's no difference.
Even with individual murders, there are gradations depending on intention and mental state. Manslaughter and first degree murder are different crimes, even if the number of dead bodies is the same.
I'm sure there are at least several people in the US who would gladly pay $12 million to directly cause someone's death without further repercussions. There are several people who could easily afford that several times a year without noticeably having to give up any wealth or expenses.
But more charitably: they did say "statistical death" so I presume the implication is "unintentional and non-targeted". Deliberately setting up deathtraps or ensuring a specific person will die but not others would probably be exempt. Of course that could be extremely difficult to prove if gross negligence became so easily affordable.
There are also millions who would volunteer to be killed for $12M to pass on to their heirs.
You "statistical death" is of course 100% correct. These kind of tradeoffs are done all the time when designing safety features, and using a monetary value per human life is the right way to do it.
Some people can't deal with that kind of rationality though.
Pay $12m in litigation to prove in litigation why your business thing is fine and legal
Pay $12m to off whoever's the driving force behind your harassment preventing them from doing it to the next guy who's pockets might not be deep enough to fend it off.
That's great, so we just need to make some scapegoat companies go bankrupt from fines occasionally and can do whatever we want? (It's already somewhat of an issue in construction industries, build shoddy homes and dissolve the company before the majority of buyers realizes how bad it is, repeat)
One of the things I have evolved on as a liberal/leftist.
There are just too many situations today where somebody is paying the fine with a smile on their face, if not settling for some trivial amount with no acknowledgement of wrongdoing.
Willful harms and even reckless harms by corporations need to be penalized aggressively and punitively. When a corporation worth $30 billion gains $1.3 billion in material benefit over 10 years by doing some activity that victimizes or risks people, it's fucking stupid to try and penalize them $10M with no jail time for anybody. "Cost of doing business" should never be a viable option, because the law needs a subjective bent, some small tyranny of justice, some adversarial person that corporations are structurally encouraged to be terrified of pissing off. If that means forcibly diluting their stock, or seizing the company, or terminating their charter, or throwing their executives down a hole for five years, that's evidently a necessary component of regulation. Deterrence is the name of the game, not just "seeking compliance".
We created corporations, and demand their executives, to behave in a psychopathic, amoral, "rational" profit-seeking manner by the legal fiduciary duty. Passively failing to significantly penalize predatory acts is actively encouraging their continuation. It's creating tools meant to do a thing (Hammers) and using them wrong (Juggling) and then acting stunned when they land on your foot, and spending the rest of the day glaring at and shaming the hammers, demanding verbal assurances that they'll never land on your foot again.
Occasionally, we hear about China rewarding corporate executives who commit malfeasance of a sufficiently malignant scale with capital punishment. The buck stops here. It sometimes makes the grass look greener on the other side, even with all the things I object to within that system.
Farmers have been at war with them. Local governments usually side with the beavers, because their longterm benefits are higher, but in right-wing crisis times the farmers will win.
I'm not sure I trust the people who get more work to do, more budget and more power out of the beavers being there anymore than I trust the farmers who would be better off with the beavers gone.
I had a horrible time with Localstack. It's very similar to AWS but not exactly the same, so you hit all kinds of annoying edges and subtle bugs or differences and you're basically just doing multi-cloud at that point. The same kinds of problems you encounter with slightly inaccurate mocks in automated testing.
The better solution in my experience is to create an entirely different account to your production environments and just deploy things there to test. At least that way you're dealing with the real SQS, S3, etc, and if you have integration problems there, they're actually real things you need to fix for it to work in prod - not just weird bandaids to make it work with Localstack too.
> Software teams at apple really need to get their act together.
WatchOS 26 has rendered my Apple Watch almost useless. It's gone from lasting a whole day including 2 cycling 'workouts' for my commute and the occasional lunch time run (or gym session before work) to now being at 40% battery by the time I make my mid-morning coffee and dead before I get home.
I don't use most of the 'smart' features anyway - I'm mostly using the fitness features - so I'll probably switch to a Garmin at some point.
> I don't use most of the 'smart' features anyway - I'm mostly using the fitness features - so I'll probably switch to a Garmin at some point.
If that's your use case, I can absolutely recommend getting one. I have a Forerunner 745 and it works great for workouts alongside some smart functions like NFC payments, quick-replies to texts, etc. The battery lasts for days as well, which you can't really beat.
For the sake of completeness, I would also mention:
- Suunto (20 to 30 days in smartwatch mode for the Verticals, optional solar charging, flashlight on the Vertical 2)
- Coros (2 to 3 weeks depending on the model), no flashlight
- Withings (30 days, looks like a regular watch)
Coros is good for how long they support their watches, and the fact that they don't restrict features in lesser models. Suunto is great for route planning. Polar is renowned for its training metrics (sleep, recovery etc.) but only fetches a week in smartwatch mode.
Also it has a proper builtin flashlight which is surprisingly useful. Amazing watch, especially if you get a comfortable aftermarket strap e.g. from Hemsut.
Dropping in to add that the Venu 4 is an amazing watch as well. Battery says it'll last 14 days. With Pulse Ox enabled at Sleep, it drops to 11, but I'm happy with the tradeoff.
Workouts like running for half an hour drop it even more, but comparing it to an Apple Watch, it's no match.
It has a flashlight as well and looks like a normal smartwatch instead of rugged. All in all, if you care more about health features rather than watch<->phone connectivity, a Garmin is worth it.
Have you tried restarting your watch? I noticed heavily increased battery drain after the update too, until I restarted the watch and everything turned normal again.
If you want to try something cheap, try the Amazfit BIP 6 watch. It costs around 1/4 of Apple watch, has most but not all of the same sensors (can't do ECG). It has far too many configuration options for my taste, but it does mean you can make it look like Apple like with Apple watch like battery life or configure it to last well over 3 weeks on a single charge. TL;DR: software is kinda clunky, but the hardware works well, and it's focus is on fitness.
I'll echo this, I've been buying these for my wife since the original Bip, and the battery life alone is more than worth it. She wears hers nearly daily.
if the language or std lib already allows for chaining then pipes aren't as attractive. They're a much nicer alternative when the other answer is nested function calls.
e.g.
So this:
take(sorted(filter(map(xs, x => x \* 2), x => x > 4)), 5)
To your example:
xs |> map(x => x \* 2) |> filter(x => x > 4) |> sorted() |> take(5)
is a marked improvement to me. Much easier to read the order of operations and which args belong to which call.
reply