otherme123

Modus ponens is a valid "If A happens, B happens in consequence. A happens. Then B also happens". A "modus ponens fail", also called "affirm the consequence" is the invalid "If A happens, B happens in consequence. B is observed. Then A happened".

Valid: if someone is hit by a train, he dies. Someone was hit by a train, then he is dead.

Invalid: if someone is hit by a train, he dies. Someone is found death, thus he must have been hit by a train.

In page F-7 they write:

Audited, revenue in 2025 is $4.6 with a computing cost of $7.3 (i.e. heavily subsidizing tokens). Unaudited, revenue in 2026 (first six months) is $16.3, computing cost $8.9 (1.83:1). But after adding personnel, sales and administrative costs, they are still spending $17.0 to get that $16.3 revenue (still subsidizing tokens, but less).

Old timer here: uv is not the first opinionated tool to manage Python packaging. It is build learning from other tools right and wrongs. I now use uv for everything because its quirks are less disruptive than quirks from previous tools that I also tried and disliked for being a bit too much for a very small gain.

What you call "dumpster fire", I call "steps towards uv", maybe even better tools in the future.

IP is not scarce, in the sense that you can have your own intelectual product that does the same than others, and you having and using an idea don't limit other people ability to have and use similar ideas. But one emerald mine is just one, and only one person can extract from it at any given time. Thus property laws as a replacement of stick-and-stone laws take place.

If you feel that your idea is worth IP protection, just protect it as a trade secret, not as a patent or copyright. Very famously Disney have a copyright over drawing three close circles.

Funny that I can't barely access any of those just because I don't have an account. Plus Facebook. They show me almost nothing and push their shitty app to nausea. And I am sure the "site" owners get zero info on how many clients they are losing for being behind that fence.

Batteries are the best dispatchable energy "source". This is the obvious next step for Germany and others.

Germany still uses coal, but I wouldn't say they are heavily dependent. They consume ~100TWh per year of coal (20% of total), down from ~300TWh in 2015 (50% of total). They plan to close them all by 2038, and they are on the way to do so even before that.

But coal is a political problem because the are producers, thus a good chunk of voters work in that industry. Political parties that promise to keep coal running could still get many votes.

> but building ITER 20 years ago wouldn’t have been a particularly significant investment.

We don't know this. There are a number of investments that fail and the investors need to let go or you get into the phallacy of sunken costs. E.g. wave energy was a failure, thermo-solar under delivered, algae based fuels never scaled up, and ethanol fuels from waste proved very difficult to engineer, syngas was a ecological nightmare... All of them received significant investment, and they were abandoned, pivoted or relegated to niche applications. I personally would throw fusion in that same group of failed investments.

Luckily for us, solar PV (paired with batteries) is a huge win that justifies all the above failures: for decades it was a dream for the 25th century, but some people make it true in the 21st.

Not every spending/investment ends up in success! Fusion is one hurdle after another, yet it advocates still believe that is just a throw-more-money-at-it problem. I am not so convinced. Of all the failed (for now) energy sources, fusion is the biggest money sink. France spent 25 billion, plus 7 billion in private funds. It is not like they are working with peanuts, at those quantities you have to show some serious results, maybe facing scaling problems rather than basic development problems (e.g. ethanol failed at scaling, when it already proved viable on smaller scale. Fusion is not even in "we have this toy reactor that works we are fighting to scale" phase).

Any industrial fridge, even many home fridges, have a sound alarm if some temperature threshold is reached. It is trivial to _send_ alerts if the threshold is crossed. What is less common is remote control.

E.g. the -80°C's in our lab are all naturally air gapped: the monitoring system is send-only.

> It could have easily been built 20+ years ago if it was an actual priority.

That is a bad thing to do. We diversified bets, and we end up finding a couple of pretty good energy sources, plus making some of the existing ones cleaner and safer.

Had we put all our money in fusion, today we might be drowning in cheap clean energy... or still living in a dirty coal-fuel environment, with a few old and dangerous fision reactors for lack of investment in development. A very risky bet.