I bought a thinkpad X1 carbon refurbished for about ~$300. I wanted to travel abroad with a laptop I wouldn't mind getting stolen if it happened. During the installation of Win11 it asked me to create a microsoft account, fuck that. I installed linux mint. Very nice experience overall, so nice to not get assaulted by ads in the start menu. Pleased to see the nightlight functionality (I googled f.lux for linux and that's how I discovered it) is built-in, and with flatpack I installed vlc, qbittorrent and obsidian. Firefox setup was straightforward. And that was it. This is a laptop for youtube and movies, I used the pre-installed libre office calc for small budget things and list making. It just worked for me.
The things that bother me about this laptop are primarily hardware related coming from using a mac laptop (which is the laptop I would mind getting stolen). Trackpad on X1 carbon is definitely not as good, battery life not as good. And opening the lid momentarily reveals what you were on before the lock screen comes on. This last one tastes more like a software issue. I had another issue with the hdmi port being finicky, but that's hardware again.
Overall very happy with this setup, linux mint is in great shape. I do wish there were fewer distro choices for people considering making the switch. It does introduce choice paralysis. I had to set aside my ego and pipe dream aspirations of being a "hacker" and went with a distro that seemed to be simple and straightforward to setup. Mint definitely is easier to install than windows, hands down, no need to create a microsoft account and you don't have to deal with all the slop features it tries to shove down your throat.
Yeah there's lots of complaining but until they move to linux, stop buying their games and cancel their subscriptions nothing will change in the enshittification path.
Amen brother! And the work-life conditions are also much better in software. I remember in grad school an executive from a big semiconductor company (I think it was ON semi) was complaining to the EE department that most students are now pursuing EE as a CS degree and very few went into hardware so they claimed the talent pool was small.
How about paying more then?
Show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome.
When I interviewed at intel the position they were offering was to be the "owner" of a tool and I'd be on call.... Yeah no thanks, I get a PhD just to be owned by some company?
How is boston dynamics doing? They do very cool stuff but it feels like they struggle commercializing their technology. I remember they were once bought by google I think? And then spat out...
Hyundai is a massive conglomerate doing a ton of different things. Having a side bet on hydrogen isn't bad, especially considering it's potential potential in applications such as aviation.
It was also the Korean automaker’s best July sales month since launching its first vehicle in 1986.
The growth was mainly driven by electrified vehicles, including EVs and hybrids (HEVs).
You'll find whole labs full of it once in a while on Bidspotter, set a saved-search for some names like Rohde and Tektronix and Keysight and you'll get emails once in a while.
Extremely good deals are rare and the chance that there’s something broken is very real. I often consider that a feature: fixing test equipment is a bit of a hobby, but be prepared to end up with a doorstop that cost a few hundred dollars.
Here are some examples that I bought though them:
- HP 8650E spectrum analyzer: works but intermittent shutdowns
- TDS 794D: works, but CRT is broken. A well know failure mode. Need to install a $75 LCD replacement.
- this R&S AMIQ: totally broken. Needed many days of work to revive.
I was a post doc and applied to an LDRD. It's not a free for all, they, the institution, already knows what topics want to fund and you write your proposal to cater to that. Very similar to tacking "AI" to your pitch these days.
It's an illusion that no-strings-attached funding exists. The government has an agenda and you're free to research anything you want, as long as it is one of the pre-determined topics. It's a very political process.
Why is this work important? To me it just feels so distant from my reality. At the core of this, is there an answer to the "who cares?" attitude?
Because if the answer is that we might incidentally create new useful technology in the build up of a new collider, why not just diversify the investment and put that money into a bunch of smaller projects? Hedge your bets sort of thing.
Why support this and not allocate more into high temperature superconductivity for example? I don't understand what is the justification that entitles such a large amount of money to a singular project.
There is a lot of interest. It may not be the most efficient use of money, but people like the feeling that scientists are trying to unravel the most fundamental nature of the universe.
People got so excited about the Higgs boson, despite having no idea what it really means. They kept asking if it had an application, but seemed to accept that the answer is "no".
I'll admit, I too would rather put the money into an array of different sciences. But the money goes where you can get interest, and a lot of other science happens in the margins.
First thought: I'm not the greatest at coming up with a stirring polemic justifying pushing out boundary science.
Next thought that come to my head is, how do I boundary-test this. ex. work my way backwards, what was the last collider worth building?
It's perfectly rational and intellectually honest to say "whichever one gave us something that got commercialized / helped people / etc."
As far as high-temperature superconductivity, I'm virtually certain if there was consensus a $XXB facility would concretely advance that, I assume it'd get funded.
I'm not certain, but I believe someone with more wherewithal / had skin in the game would argue that there's no reason to think this isn't that facility. (in that, advancing the boundary of physics tends to bring breakthroughs down the pipeline)
> what was the last collider worth building?...It's perfectly rational and intellectually honest to say "whichever one gave us something that got commercialized / helped people / etc."
It seems like the LHC wouldn't pass this test? In which case, continuing down the path wouldn't make sense under this criteria.
(the thing is, "continuing down the path" is a Not Even Wrong (in the Pauli sense) description of what's going on. It's a hopelessly confused. At least, I have given up hope: I wrote a quite detailed post, with both a TL;DR and longer, linking out to an approachable article, explaining this.)
How come Milei, a master economist, go on to promote something he later said he didn't understand? This is the quality of leaders coming into power all over the world. Bunch of incompetent people (in the most charitable read of the situation) or bunch of grifters (in the least charitable read).
Some reports indicate he gets paid to say things about products or companies, which has more credibility because he’s, you know, the president. And that’s what happened with this meme coin thing.
He was never a master a master economist. This is a purposeful memetic disinformation campaign promoted by the owners of first-world mass media.
He holds a degree from a third-rate private university. Private university is where you go to school in Argentina for when you don't have the chops for public university and need to go to a degree mill.
His doctorate is from another bullshit institution made up by a rotting old landowning oligarch who holds prehistoric beliefs in just about everything.
It’s part of a cheeky joke. There’s an adage that if you really need to find a correct answer, go online and confidently give the wrong answer. More people will jump on to tell you you’re wrong than would answer the question if you asked.
That’s called Cunningham’s law. The joke (which is actually quite funny) is that GP gave the wrong name for it and proved it.
It wasn’t clear and I understand the confusion but welcome into the joke, my friend. :)
The things that bother me about this laptop are primarily hardware related coming from using a mac laptop (which is the laptop I would mind getting stolen). Trackpad on X1 carbon is definitely not as good, battery life not as good. And opening the lid momentarily reveals what you were on before the lock screen comes on. This last one tastes more like a software issue. I had another issue with the hdmi port being finicky, but that's hardware again.
Overall very happy with this setup, linux mint is in great shape. I do wish there were fewer distro choices for people considering making the switch. It does introduce choice paralysis. I had to set aside my ego and pipe dream aspirations of being a "hacker" and went with a distro that seemed to be simple and straightforward to setup. Mint definitely is easier to install than windows, hands down, no need to create a microsoft account and you don't have to deal with all the slop features it tries to shove down your throat.
reply