The point is to not write bugs in the first place. At the point you’ve noticed a bug and measured it in your bug tracker you’ve missed your goal. You did not write “without bugs.”
Why does the time horizon matter? Imagine I own an immortal goose that lays a golden egg every 100 years. I may not live to see an egg but I can sell the goose based on the expected future payout. A bank could invent some financial instrument that pays me 1/100th of a golden egg every year for a fee.
> California’s water board doesn’t have the staff it would need to monitor river levels statewide
Isn't water flow rate automatically collected, at least for larger rivers and creeks? Can't low flow be flagged automatically?
> Even if the state water board had learned of the Merced’s withered conditions earlier that summer, it might still have taken months to enact new regulations to protect the river
This seems like something that shouldn't require enacting new regulations. Enact the regulation once, and enforce the regulation always.
When a company isn't profitable you hire developers to build a product which can make you profitable. When a company is profitable, you fire all the developers and start collecting dividends.
Cities are the engines of the early 20-th century economy. The modern economy is much better served by people living in comfortable suburban locations.
The modern economy is much better served by people living in comfortable locations that are walkable rather than requiring a wasteful car to merely live. (American-style) suburbs will never be the engine of anything, they're neither agriculturally productive like rural areas nor as economically efficient as urban areas.
On top of that, the car requirement is in effect a gigantic tax: every person has to pay tens of thousands of dollars just to own a car, and many thousands to tens of thousands every year to operate and insure and maintain it. And that's a direct tax on every person.
Then there's the maintenance costs for all the roadways needed to support all these cars, all the parking lots to park them in, etc. All that comes out of either direct taxes on people, or an indirect tax in the form of higher prices.
Finally, this doesn't even consider the climate consequences of everyone driving around in a 6000-pound SUV; all these cars spewing emissions are turning those suburbs into very *un*comfortable locations with deadly heat waves.
But good luck getting any Americans like the OP to understand any of this.
> On top of that, the car requirement is in effect a gigantic tax: every person has to pay tens of thousands of dollars just to own a car, and many thousands to tens of thousands every year to operate and insure and maintain it. And that's a direct tax on every person.
Wait until you hear how much public transit infrastructure costs. You'll faint from shock!
> Finally, this doesn't even consider the climate consequences of everyone driving around in a 6000-pound SUV
>Wait until you hear how much public transit infrastructure costs. You'll faint from shock!
Considering how cheap it is for me to take the subway anywhere I want in Tokyo every day, it's not that much. Compared to roads, highways, etc. in sufficient size for every single person in the city to drive a car everywhere, public transit infrastructure costs are cheap.
Strangely in America, though, drivers aren't required to pay every time they use those roads. Seems like socialism to me.
> Yeah, it says right in your link that transit is the greenest way to travel, other than walking or bicycling (which should be pretty obvious).
Reading comprehension much?
Bus: 105g/km, small EV: 46 g/km, national rail: 41 g/km, London underground: 31 g/km.
Basically, we just need to double the average occupancy of cars (easily doable with mild carpooling and van-type self-driving taxis), and they'll be more efficient than even subways.
> I guess you've never questioned yours, or ever been outside the US even.
LOL. I speak 5 languages (Russian, Ukrainian, English, German, Mandarin Chinese) and I got my first driving license at the age of 30. Before moving to the US, I lived in several European countries.
I know exactly how much transit sucks compared to cars in well-designed cities.
>Nope. You're just free-riding on taxes paid by other hard-working people, nothing is "free".
Tokyo's trains are paid by user fares, not taxes. You obviously know nothing about Japan.
>In the state where I live, most of road maintenance is done with taxes based on road usage
The taxes don't come from the drivers. Try putting tolls on all the highways and see what happens.
>Basically, we just need to double the average occupancy of cars (easily doable with mild carpooling and van-type self-driving taxis), and they'll be more efficient than even subways.
This is stupid. They've tried carpooling for decades in the US and it hasn't gone anywhere. Turns out that it's just too inconvenient when everyone is so spread out.
>I know exactly how much transit sucks compared to cars in well-designed cities.
> The taxes don't come from the drivers. Try putting tolls on all the highways and see what happens.
The funds for road maintenance here absolutely come from drivers, in the form of fuel taxes, car tab fees, and toll lanes/bridges. See the explanation in the article.
> This is stupid. They've tried carpooling for decades in the US and it hasn't gone anywhere. Turns out that it's just too inconvenient when everyone is so spread out.
About 9% of people carpool. And this requires coordination, with driverless taxis you don't need any. Just request a "shared ride" from the app.
> You've never lived in a well-designed city.
I lived in Houston for a while. I couldn't stand the weather, but the city itself is amazingly well-designed. Nothing like miserable European cities.
You, quite clearly, have not yet dared to walk out of your assigned "15-minute neighborhood".
From your article:
>That year Tokyu generated $2.63 billion in revenue en route to $587 million in profits. Rail fares brought in about a third of that figure, real estate holdings reap another third, and retail about a fifth.
Rail fares brought in 1/3 of Tokyu's entire revenue. Tokyu isn't a train company, it's a conglomerate that owns a train company, real estate, and more. The article doesn't say anything about how much of the rail operations are paid by user fares.
>You, quite clearly, have not yet dared to walk out of your assigned "15-minute neighborhood".
I grew up in the US, you moron. I've seen all types of cities. Have fun getting shot by road ragers over there.
> The modern economy is much better served by people living in comfortable locations that are walkable
Why? Walkability ties you down to your neighborhood by rote, it limits your economic prospects, and in general makes your life more miserable (you'll _waste_ a lot more time on chores).
At the same time, remote work and service-based economy allows people to avoid having to attend the office every day.
> (American-style) suburbs will never be the engine of anything
LOL. Sour grapes?
The US suburbs are _already_ the powerhouse of the country. People living there produce something like 85% of the wealth (using individual tax returns as a proxy).
How do cancers have sophisticated mechanisms for evading immune responses when they don’t have any adaptive pressure? The cancer dies with the victim. It seems like the equivalent of mashing on the keyboard and getting a valid program.
They do have adaptive pressure. 100s of millions of years of single cell evolutionary instincts live within our cells and the desire to survive. Being a multicellular organism is a relatively new learned behavior, and a human cell returning to that old mindset is basically cancer.
The only problem is that these individually minded (cancer) cells have every ability of your healthy cells and have basically stopped caring about the greater whole and care about themselves. Then they evolve at a micro level for their survival to fend off chemo, immune system, radiation etc. All it takes is one adapted/surviving cell to come back strong.
The sophisticated mechanisms for evasion exist because they have all the methods of evading your immune system that healthy multicellular organisms need to function and they multiply and increase their mutation rate to try new methods to survive and thrive.
I view cancer cells as single cells to understand their behavior with the adaptations of all the healthy cells returning to their “baser instincts”.
Source: Caretaker of a cancer patient and former cell bio major
They have immense adaptive pressure at the cellular level. The evolutionary process plays out within each patient. Aberrant cells that don’t have some sort of evasion mechanism will be identified and destroyed by the immune system.
I've heard a hypothesis that cancer behavior is not primarily evolved in the patient, but instead it is an ancient mechanism from the time of transition from single cell to multi cell organism.
A human cell can never survive on its own. But there might have been a time when cells could have benefited from "pulling the escape hatch" and taking their chances instead of continuing cooperation within a damaged early multicellular organism.
I’m just another guy throwing ideas, maybe the cancer should be compared to a virus or bacteria, where their life cycle is much shorter than humans, the objective is maximum growth, then it dies as any other organism
