Non-tech people tend to think similarly about developers, breaking things that worked fine until yesterday / last week / last month, for no user-visible benefit.
TLDR: Cochrane thinks the Fed wants keep a lid on narrow banking because it believes it can cross-subsidizing lending to households and businesses from retail deposits.
"Production" can mean many different things to different people. It's very widely used as a backend strutured file format in Android and iOS/macOS (e.g. for appls like Notes, Photos). Is that "production"? It's not widely used and largely inappropriate for applications with many concurrent writes.
Sqlite docs has a good overview of appropriate and inappropriate uses: https://sqlite.org/whentouse.html
It's best to start with Section 2 "Situations Where A Client/Server RDBMS May Work Better"
Sorry for my negativity / meta comment on this thread. From what I can tell the stackexchange discussion in the submission already to provides all the relevant points to be discussed about this.
While the asymmetry of least squares will probably be a bit of a novelty/surprise to some, pretty much anything posted here is more or less a copy of one of the comments on stackexchange.
[Challenge: provide a genuinely novel on-topic take on the subject.]
But bringing it up as a topic, aside from being informative, allows for more varied conversation that is allowed on stack exchange, like exploring alternative modeling approaches. It may not have happened, but the possibility can only present itself given the opportunity
I'm believe /sbin was introduced/standardized in System V Release 4. It's present in SVR4 (1988) but not in SVR3 (1987). Another candidate is would be some old BSD (check 4.2 or 4.3 (1986) if anyone has a running system).
I'm guessing it was introduced to finally move out all the (mostly system) binaries from /etc, which in ancient Unix from Bell Labs in the 1970s really meant "etc", as in stuff that didn't fit elsewhere rather than system config files, so it contained binaries like init, mount, umount.
macOS has all of that (mostly inherited from NeXTSTEP which was significantly based on 4.3/4.4BSD). It's hidden by default in the GUI, visible in Terminal.
Nowadays most end users just use /usr/local or /opt/local or whatever is managed by Homebrew or Macports.
This is Unix V4 from 1973. The total number of installations world wide was around 20, all inside Bell Labs. There was no networking support at all, so security was mostly physical, i.e., office building security (though you could dial in with a modem). Multi-user support was a bunch of serial-line terminals. Pretty much everyone knew everyone else who was on the system.
They were already mailing distribution tapes -- the software being run here was extracted off one of them (which had literally been lost in a store room for decades).
I'd reverse the question ask why Germany (or any other country where English is not an official language, and does not majorly rely on tourism for income) would provide any public information in English? Commercial services can choose to do so a matter of self interest, but why would state financed services?
Problem is that failing to communicate will lead to huge productivity holes, so to "fix it", either the natives need to learn a non native language or the incoming immigrants need to learn the native language..
So, attracting the international workforce to come Germany vs being able to fully utilise them are completely different ballparks..
This is Germany we're talking about, right? Something like half the population already speaks English to some degree and that is specifically concentrated in the part of the country that is already highly educated and would be working with those immigrants.
Educated immigrants often consider countries interchangeable. They are in a country, because they found an opportunity and took it. But they are not committed to stay, because better opportunities could arise elsewhere. When you have already immigrated once, doing it again is only going to get easier.
Immigrants with fewer opportunities are more likely to try to learn the language and integrate. When a country is offering them something they can't find anywhere else, it makes more sense to go through all that effort. Even knowing that they will probably never fully fit in.
Deutsche Bahn is completely state owned, UK rail is privatized. They're both pretty bad. China's new high speed rail is state owned, while the Japanese network is largely private. They're both far better than UK and Germany. I wonder what are the main determinants of the quality of large infra networks? State ownership only seems to have a very loose correlation, where even the sign of the relationship is unclear.
DB is state owned, yes ... but it's run like a private company. It's basically the classic "privatize profits, socialize losses" - done as a yearly routine.
Not even remotely exaggerating, it's incredibly corrupt.
DB‘s quality decline started when this move to privatization happened. They didn’t put money into maintenance, closed lot of tracks and ignored all warnings by experts who predicted this exact scenario more than a decade ago. Most of the time now DB issues seem to be connected to a lack of available tracks. A super fast ICE has to wait for some slow train to clear the path. There’s an issue on one track and thus the entire traffic is backed up till that’s resolved.
I do think they’re working on improving these conditions. But I wish they did more to communicate that. Where is the big marketing campaign explaining how they got there, apologizing, and explaining how they will do better?
When the owner of DB is owned by the German federal government, they all rule the whole company, who gets the profit? The German federal government? (It's a sign of stupidity to claim DB is privat. It is not. It is not.)
That's why I said it's incredibly corrupt. It's an Aktiengesellschaft which is fully owned by the state, so profits would remain in the ownership of the company and their leadership to do with as they please, e.g. pay themselves whatever bonuses they want . (Or pay out to their shareholders? Lol, nope).
losses get pushed to be picked up by the state/taxes.
" It's an Aktiengesellschaft which is fully owned by the state, so profits would remain in the ownership of the company and their leadership to do with as they please, e.g. pay themselves whatever bonuses they want . "
That's plain wrong. The owner decides which happens to the profits and how much the leadership got paied.
Besides that, it is just rambling. Again calling the DB privatised is a sign of stupidity.
The determinant is the amount of money invested in infrastructure.
No matter whether the train operators and the network operator are private or a state monopoly, all decisions about major upgrades and new lines are made and funded by the government. The network operator just deals with the maintenance.
Nationalisation(or sometimes privatisation!) is seemingly seen by many as panacea, but it won't help you if your network runs at 150% capacity every day.
Not completely. Transport for Wales is state owned, or at least Welsh government, and control most of the local trains in Wales and out to some bits of England. Some of the UK infrastructure is state owned or funded. The state provides the licences as well, so they are not off the hook in that sense.
reply