That cost makes absolutely no sense. It takes one single day for a couple of people to install solar and batteries on a residential house.

Baumol's Cost Disease at work, I guess.

It's a third or fourth of the price in Australia with equivalent labor costs.

It's mostly unnecessary red tape and a broken market that cause the differences.

Australian labor costs are significantly lower than the US, as are labor costs in most countries. Americans are paid pretty well.

Solar installer costs are broadly comparable as Australians are better qualified and even if they weren't comparable the fraction of the cost isn't enough to explain the total difference.

There's various studies comparing the two countries, Tesla did one and found various technical approach changes and permitting reforms. It suggests labor is 7% of the cost in the US. Soft costs around acquisition, sales and marketing can be 18%.

Your expectations are wild. Most software engineers could not write a game boy emulator - and now you need zero programming skills whatsoever to write one.

Ctrl-C + Ctrl-V. There. Done!

I also wonder this - my best theory is getting institutional buy-in from all corners will help with the regulation going forward.

There's an 8k license for "recommended" (not "core", which is free under CC-BY-4.0 for all purposes) data if you are a service provider or broadcaster:

https://user.eumetsat.int/resources/user-guides/data-registr...

There are also fees in some other circumstances, but not for "personal, educational, research" use.

lame, with GOES-18 you can just download the latest full disk image in real time. Makes for a nifty desktop background when combined with a systemd user timer that fetches the current picture of the earth every 15 minutes.

https://www.goes-r.gov/multimedia/dataAndImageryImagesGoes-1...

Hah! I don't believe this for a second. No, you need the 8k, a business entity (at the very least), five different licenses of some sort, and then some form of accreditation.

>exactly what "stupid" people do when their are somewhat aware of the limits of their competence

Being aware of one's limitations is the strongest hallmark of intelligence I've come across...

I'm not so sure it's about knowing his own limitations, rather it's about building a reliable process and trusting that process more than either technology or people.

Any process that relies on 100% accuracy from either people or technology will eventually fail. It's just a basic matter of statistics. However, there are processes that CAN, at least in theory, be 100% effective.

So following that strange logic if a dumb person knows he's dumb, he's suddenly become intelligent? Or is that impossible by your peculiar definition of intelligence?

Knowing your limits has to be a sign of intelligence.

"Dumb" people (FTR the description actually refers to something rather than that which you think it does...) run around on the internet getting mad because they haven't thought things through...

It's an interesting question though. I know quite some "smart" people who lack self awareness to an almost fatal degree yet can outdo the vast majority of the population at solving logic puzzles. It tends to be a rather frustrating condition to deal with.

I think that you are conflating things.

Knowing your limits is a sign of intelligence, but it's not the only one, and it's not a requirement. Meaning that not having that understanding doesn't exclude you from being intelligent.

Yeah that sounds like wisdom, not intelligence.

I love the simplicity of the System 1/2 breakdown - but is there any actual evidence behind it? It seems like such a classic pop-psychology observational deduction of how something might work with no science to prove it.

In cognitive psychology there's all sorts of evidence that we have two distinct processes, but I don't think anyone has really mapped it to a physical system yet.

Modeling two physical systems is pretty interesting though because dementia ends up looking like a clear failure of System 2. Really neat idea generator even if imperfect.

That's just not how the EU functions.

# Deprecated APIs resp.getheader("Content-Length")

# Recommended APIs resp.headers.get("Content-Length")

Why inflict this change on tens of millions of users? It's such a nonsense tiny busywork change. Let sleeping dogs lie.

This is exactly the sort of breaking change that I really struggle to see the value of — maintaining the deprecated method seems incredibly unlikely to be a notable maintenance burden when it is literally just:

    @deprecated("Use response.headers.get(name) instead")
    def getheader(self, name):
        return self.headers.get(name)

Like sure — deprecate it, which might have _some_ downstream cost, rather than having two non-deprecated ways to do the same thing, just to make it clear which one people should be using; but removing it has a much more significant cost on every downstream user, and the cost of maintenance of the old API seems like it should be almost nothing.

(I also don't hate the thought of having a `DeprecationWarning` subclass like `IndefiniteDeprecationWarning` to make it clear that there's no plan to remove the deprecated function, which can thus be ignored/be non-fatal in CI etc.)

There is value for the person maintaining this library cause they want it that way. If you develop a useful library and give it away for free then all power to you if you want to rearrange the furniture every 6 months. I'll roll with it.

I definitely agree with the sentiment that people working for free can do whatever the heck they want.

But if you're trying to help your users and grow your project, I think GP's advice is sound.

You are, of course, correct.

But the fact that they made a new release with it undeprecated shows they _do_ care about their users (direct and indirect), and at least from my point of view (both from the Python ecosystem and the browser ecosystem) this was a pretty foreseeable outcome.

> If you develop a useful library and give it away for free then all power to you if you want to rearrange the furniture every 6 months.

That would make it no longer a useful library

No Atlassian products are included in the ban. I think you have seen a joke.

Yeah turns out that is the case, it was a joke image but the person didn't say it was a joke and posted it as if it was real :\

Social media ...

Welcome to the internet!

> These platforms make more money than the ATO (Australian Tax Office) brings in a year.

From their users in Australia? Clearly not.