skmurphy

They confer advantage over many weeds according to the article.

I think the meaning was "why did you write this?"

It's hand curated verbatim extracts designed to encourage HN members to read the full article. The clickbait title does not provide accurate context for the article which details events from 1990.

Reasonable people may differ and your mileage may vary. What were your key takeaways from the article?

I left out the points about shortcomings of Bourlag's wheat and the value of genetic diversity in a population. But my focus was to encourage people to read an article I found significant.

On a side note I don't use AI to craft HN comments beyond sometimes using Grammarly to check them for basic errors.

key points about wheat Gross (the Italian farmer) discovered in 1990 his attic:

+ It fared better during droughts, growing so tall that it overshadowed the weeds. It didn’t need fertilizer or herbicides.

+ It's height can be a liability. Heavy winds, rains and hail can make the tall stems flip over before the grain ripens, ruining harvests.

+ Working with the lab of Teofilo Vamerali, Perobelli determined that the grain was Triticum turgidum—literally “swollen wheat” in Latin. Known in English as “poulard wheat,” it had originally evolved in what today are Turkey, Egypt and other nearby Mediterranean countries. And searching agricultural references, Perobelli found that it had been grown in Italy, too, until farmers shifted toward higher-yield commercial varieties. That solved the mystery of the seed bag stashed away in the attic: It had survived because Grossi’s grandfather saved some of the heritage grains.

This October 2026 roundup lists online events for bootstrappers including Bootstrappers Breakfast and Lean Culture.

There are also in-person Bootstrapper Breakfast meetings in Las Vegas, San Francisco, and Silicon Valley.

These events are for “entrepreneurs who eat problems for breakfast.”®

Estimates are tricky but it seems like there is a rough consensus that CCP cumulative carbon emissions will pass the US between 2035 and 2050. The calculation that matters for global impact is total emission levels. We only have one atmosphere. While decision making that affects the total is a mix of individual and governmental, in a totalitarian state government decisions outweigh individual ones by orders or magnitude.

I did not realize your primary concern was saving US consumers money. If that's the case then my question is irrelevant. The original article was focused on global carbon emissions, which was the context for my question.

what's your forecast for crossover point of total carbon emission from coal China vs. US?

Shouldn't it be more about absolute impact? Tell me when you think the crossover occurs and US exceed Chinese use?