Normally? Zero. LGA has a curfew from midnight to six AM, April 5-December 31.
In practice? It depends. Delays have a tendency to cascade in the air travel system and the Port Authority can curtail or cancel the curfew at their discretion. How frequently do exceptions to normal ops have to happen for it to be unreasonable to use "normal ops traffic" as a justification for scheduling a single controller? Ultimately, controllers have to control the traffic that they get, not the traffic that they want/expect to get, and a system that is overly optimized becomes brittle and unable to deal with exceptions to the norm.
It depends strongly on implementation. LEDs can produce white light at any color temperature and CRIs ranging from terrible to great. Quality LEDs are quite nice indeed (when they're not turning purple).
Most LED streetlights replaced sodium vapor lights, though, which produce the sickliest, most horrible orange color known to humanity. Just about any LED is an improvement over those.
Strange! I was going to say the exact opposite. I find the near-white light from LEDs very harsh and tiring to my eyes. I often end up rubbing my eyes under them. The sodium orange feels cooler and easier. The strain on my eyes is similar to daylight, but without the alertness it induces. (White LEDs actually feel worse than daylight, for some reason)
There were articles a few years back stating that the blue emissions from these LEDs were rather energetic and damaging to the retina. Conversely, some articles used to claim that red light actually improves the health of the retina. I don't know if those results were corroborated or debunked afterwards.
I know that personal beliefs and biases affect our perceptions. But such diametrically opposite experiences are surprising. I'm curious to know what everyone else experiences and any insights on this.
> Sodium lights aren’t even orange in the normal sense of the word. They only emit one wavelength.
It's hard to think of a more normal sense of the word "orange" than "emitting and/or reflecting predominantly wavelengths between 590 and 620 nm." I guess you could argue that sodium is close enough to that lower edge to be yellow?
Low-pressure sodium lamps emit a single wavelength and they are the only kind of lamp that does not use LEDs, but which can match or exceed the energy efficiency of LED lamps. However, with low-pressure sodium lamps you cannot perceive any color.
There are also high-pressure sodium lamps. They emit a broad-spectrum light, even if with an excess of orange-yellow light. You can perceive the colors of things with such lamps, even if not very well. However the high-pressure sodium lamps have a much lower energy efficiency than LED lamps.
In Europe I have encountered mostly, or perhaps only, high-pressure LED lamps used for public lighting. I have used at home some low-pressure sodium lamps for certain purposes, but I am not sure if I have ever seen one like that used in a public space, here in Europe.
Low-pressure sodium lamps typically use transparent glass bulbs, like incandescent lamps or any other kind of low-pressure gas-discharge lamps, e.g. neon lamps.
High-pressure sodium lamps use special bulbs made of translucent alumina ceramic, because glass would not survive in those conditions.
What is the normal sense of the word? I only know the CIE standard observer to define colour and with this it is clearly in the equivalence class of orange.
I think they mean they don't emit a "natural" orange (like an orange flower) that is really some kind of sum of many wavelengths. I could be wrong though.
A pure orange contains only light with a single wavelength.
A mixture of light with different wavelengths that is perceived as orange cannot be distinguished from a mixture of some pure orange with a certain amount of white light.
So any orange, of a flower or of anything else, has the hue of a single wavelength, but it may be more or less saturated, appearing like light with a single wavelength mixed with some white light.
Low-pressure sodium lamps emit a pure color that belongs to the yellow-orange range, so you could describe it as a yellowish orange.
High-pressure sodium lamps have a desaturated orange color, i.e. light that looks like a mixture of orange and white lights.
The orange of any kind of sodium lamp is much more yellowish than the reddish orange of neon lamps with cathodic light, like those used in neon indicators.
Most sodium lamps contain some neon for starting, so when they are switched on they may emit a reddish orange light for a short time, then change to a yellowish orange light, when the sodium vapor takes over from neon.
This is true but irrelevant when cost reduction is the motivating factor for switching to LED lighting, because that motivation will extend to the upfront purchase cost of the lamps and they will buy whatever is cheapest.
It depends, obviously, but when installed by governments, "cost reduction" almost always takes into account labor to replace faulty lamps, which is especially relevant when there are thousands of the things out there. So governments (for the most part--there are exceptions) avoid the cheapest ones, correctly identifying them as a false economy. The cheap ones are most likely to be found in private parking lots, because parking lot owners are generally only responsible for a handful of lamps and it's a pretty minor part of their business, so they're not going to put much thought into it.
The benefit of sodium vapor is it emits a narrow band wavelength. So then if you want to engage in astrophotography you can use a narrow band filter and eliminate quite a lot of local light pollution.
Democrats? Democrats??? Like Karen Bass and Gavin Newsom are out there burning cars. Come on, man. These things are done by impulsive opportunists, not as some kind of political strategy. They happen during sports celebrations, regularly, all over the world.
Yes, democrats. You seem to confused by some basic logic. Protesters and rioters are democrats (in this case). Doesn't mean that all democrats are protesting or rioting. I can't believe I have to explain this.
No, I'm objecting to what I view as a quite extreme reductionism. If the way you interpret events like the protests in LA is first to classify all people as "Democrat", "Republican", and "Other", you greatly impoverish your view of things.
No, I think you're just frustrated that I'm correct, that your side is engaged in violence, again, so you're trying to distance yourself from it, and so you make up all this nonsense.
The alternative minimum tax is certainly not the default for most people; you have to make quite a lot for that to be relevant. Do you mean the standard deduction?
I think things like Halstead complexity or cyclomatic complexity are more heuristic than law. To read code, the most important thing to me is the abstractions that are built, and how effectively they bury irrelevant complexities and convey important concepts.
As an example, I recently refactored some Java code that was calling a service that returned a list of Things, but it was paged: You might have to make multiple calls to the service to get all the Things back. The original code used a while loop to build a list, and later in the same function did some business logic on the Things. My refactoring actually made things more complex: I created a class called a Spliterator that iterated through each page, and when it was exhausted, called the service again to get the next one. The upside was, this allowed me to simply put the Things in a Stream<Thing> and, crucially, buried the paged nature of the request one level deeper. My reasoning is that separating an implementation detail (the request being paged) from the business logic makes the code easier to read, even if static code analysis would rate the code as slightly more complex. Also, the code that handles the pages is fairly robust and probably doesn't need to be the focus of developer attention very often, if ever, while the code that handles the business logic is much more likely to need changes from time to time.
As programmers, we have to deal with a very long chain of abstractions, from CPU instructions to network calls to high-falutin' language concepts all the way up to whatever business logic we're trying to implement. Along the way, we build our own abstractions. We have to take care that the abstractions we build benefit our future selves. Complexity measures can help measure this, but we have to remember that these measures are subordinate to the actual goal of code, which is communicating a complex series of rules and instructions to two very different audiences: The compiler/interpreter/VM/whatever, and our fellow programmers (often, our future selves who have forgotten half of the details about this code). We have to build high-quality abstractions to meet the needs of those two audiences, but static code analysis is only part of the puzzle.
Gave away a copy to a developer in Brazil, and ordered the Kindle version, and need to order another print copy.
Can't recommend it highly enough --- I found it transformative --- read through it one chapter at a time, then re-worked the code of my current project:
Fluoride has two major differences that would complicate such a study: First, fluoride is a natural component of lots of drinking water (often at levels far higher than artificial fluoridation creates), while lead contamination in drinking water is rare and usually human-caused. Second, lead is known to be bad for one's health in any amount, while fluoride is only known to cause IQ drops above a certain dose.
> This systematic review and meta-analysis found inverse associations and a dose-response association between fluoride measurements in urine and drinking water and children’s IQ across the large multicountry epidemiological literature. There were limited data and uncertainty in the dose-response association between fluoride exposure and children’s IQ when fluoride exposure was estimated by drinking water alone at concentrations less than 1.5 mg/L.
It seems to me that your main mistake here is assuming that parties like the US Democratic Party, the UK Labour Party, the Canadian Liberal Party, etc. are left-wing. They aren't. They've been practicing "Third Way" politics for decades now, and there's very little left-wing about their proposals. IMO this is the source of a lot of public discontent with these parties: They don't offer a true alternative, just a diet version of the same policies that largely harm the public.
> Was Bill Clinton "right wing" because of his free trade politics (eg NAFTA)?
Yes! This is the point. Who benefited from Clinton's economic policies? It certainly wasn't the employees of the companies who offshored production because they were incentivized to by NAFTA. By capitulating to the right on economic issues and trying to differentiate only on the basis of social issues, the Democratic Party ceded its strongest argument: That turbo-capitalist (as you put it) economic policy only benefits corporations and the wealthy, and harms labor and the country as a whole. Democrats as a party cannot credibly make that argument anymore, because they're fully complicit. A few politicians carry lonely torches for actual left-wing politics (e.g. Bernie Sanders), but for the most part, there's close to zero power behind left wing ideas today.
Broadly, left-wing politics favors making money and power more diffuse and is suspicious of hierarchy, right-wing politics favors making money and power more concentrated and embraces hierarchy. Politics is, of course, messy and not everything fits neatly into this framework (and people have idiosyncratic opinions sometimes), but that's how I view it in broad strokes. What about you?
> Broadly, left-wing politics favors making money and power more diffuse and is suspicious of hierarchy
How do you "make money more diffuse"?
I would agree that the hierarchy thing is broadly correct, and many use this definition, but I find it unsatisfactory, as it does not move me in any way. "Yeah hierarchy is so cool man" said no one ever.
Taking left-wing ideology at face value is a mistake, what is interesting is the underlying psychology. The stated goals and how it plays out in practise are never aligned, thus the "real communism has never been tried" meme. If you are attached to leftism or simply never delved deeper into political philosophy, these definitions might offend you, but they are psychologically correct:
"The bugman pretends to be motivated by compassion, but is instead motivated by a titanic hatred of the well-turned-out and beautiful." [BAP]
"Communism is when ugly deformed freaks make it illegal to be normal then rob and/or kill all successful people out of petty resentment and cruelty. The ideology is all just window dressing." [Mystery Grove]
> I would agree that the hierarchy thing is broadly correct, and many use this definition, but I find it unsatisfactory, as it does not move me in any way. "Yeah hierarchy is so cool man" said no one ever.
And yet, the two quotes you put forth as "psychologically correct" both use hierarchies as assumed priors. In the first, a hierarchy between "the well-turned-out and beautiful" and everyone else, and in the second, a hierarchy between "ugly deformed freaks" and "normal [people]". Do you feel that these are useful distinctions to make when setting public policy?
> Taking left-wing ideology at face value is a mistake
Taking any ideology at face value is a mistake. Words are cheap; it's easy to say one thing and do another, especially when political parties control entire media ecosystems due to the consolidation of media companies that the root comment of this thread was discussing. Is the Chinese Communist Party communist in any meaningful sense? Does it serve to weaken or reinforce hierarchies? Does it seek to empower its constituents, or consolidate power for the benefit of the few?
> How do you "make money more diffuse"?
There are tons of ways to do this, some better, some worse, and I think it's out of scope to go through them all. We do at least have a direct measurement of this one, though, called the Gini coefficient.
> Taking any ideology at face value is a mistake. Words are cheap; it's easy to say one thing and do another, especially when political parties control entire media ecosystems due to the consolidation of media companies that the root comment of this thread was discussing. Is the Chinese Communist Party communist in any meaningful sense? Does it serve to weaken or reinforce hierarchies? Does it seek to empower its constituents, or consolidate power for the benefit of the few?
I agree. This is why studying history is important.
> [...] Gini coefficient
So, equality. How did that work out for checks notes every single time it was tried, ever.
> "Yeah hierarchy is so cool man" said no one ever.
Perhaps not in those exact words. I'd argue that an implicit desire for hierarchy pervades a lot of right-wing thought. E.g. wanting a strong leader, a harsh penalty system, and traditional paternalistic social stratification.
Isn't that the whole point? SimCity and all its sequels and imitators present a very simplified set of tools and mechanics. Those tools and mechanics are more than the sum of their parts: They entertain, they teach, they advance a political opinion (Jeff Braun has been explicit about this[0]) and yes, they simulate, albeit very simplistically. The intersection of those things and the tradeoffs that are required in all simulations (which all reside on a spectrum of toy to faithful representation) are interesting. IMO it's (ironically) too simplistic to say that SimCity is a mere game and thus unworthy of thinking more deeply about, and I suggest that you're taking that "world in a machine" marketing phrase a bit too literally.
Heat pumps are much more common in warm areas than cold ones, because the difference between an A/C and a heat pump is really just the ability to reverse the refrigerant flow, and they're very efficient at heating in mildly cold weather. I grew up in Florida, and pretty much every house there had a heat pump even thirty years ago, with electric resistive heating that kicks in when ambient temperatures drop below 40F or so. Where heat pumps don't work so well is when ambient temperatures are very cold, which is why adoption in northern states has been much slower.
EDIT: My grandparents' house had a thermostat that looked like this: https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/uqsAAOSwTVlbyNN9/s-l1200.jpg They would call very cold (for Florida) weather "blue light weather", because the blue "aux heat" light would turn on on their thermostat, indicating that the system had switched from the heat pump to the resistive heat strips.
My sister just got a heat pump installed in her new house in Poland, where temperatures occasionally drop to 0 Fahrenheit. I wouldn't say they only work in "mildly cold weather" - as per new EU policy heat pumps will be one of the few legal heat sources, even in countries such as Sweden.
Modern heat pumps can work in very cold weather, but they're much less efficient, which is reflected in their COP numbers. In my house in Chicago, we have a hybrid system--the heat pump works down to 20F or so, and we have a natural gas furnace for colder times. Natural gas is very cheap here, so this is the most cost-effective solution at the moment. I'm very eager to electrify and remove my dependence on natural gas, but I think it will be at least a few more years unless there's some breakthrough in cold-weather heat pump efficiency, or an enduring spike in natural gas prices--last time I did the math, the breakeven point for electrification here is around a COP of 4, which no heat pump can do at typical Chicago winter temperatures.
If I were building a brand new house, I probably would do it 100% electric. But most people here already have natural gas furnaces, and when they reach end-of-life they're usually replaced with another natural gas furnace. Hybrid systems like mine are catching on, but it will be a while before 100% electric is commonplace here.
I consider a winter where the coldest it gets is 0F a mild winter. The important thing isn't average or normal it is the worst case. I've personally seen -25F here in the last 10 years - it was only one time and lasted about a week, but that means the HVAC system needs to work down to at least -25F just in case.
I don't know what the climate is like in Poland. Maybe 0F is as cold as you ever get and you are okay. Maybe your system will work to -20F even though you haven't tested it. But your might have a system like mine that while it can deliver heat at 0F, it is sized such that below 30F it can't deliver enough heat (I have the backup system for those colder days)
In practice? It depends. Delays have a tendency to cascade in the air travel system and the Port Authority can curtail or cancel the curfew at their discretion. How frequently do exceptions to normal ops have to happen for it to be unreasonable to use "normal ops traffic" as a justification for scheduling a single controller? Ultimately, controllers have to control the traffic that they get, not the traffic that they want/expect to get, and a system that is overly optimized becomes brittle and unable to deal with exceptions to the norm.
reply