I got an FTP account, mounted it locally with curlftpfs, and use SVN on the mounted filesystem. Quite trivial, really.

Guaranteed 98.9% positive feedback (https://xkcd.com/325)

> Running a site for others to download movies doesn't bother me.

> being a snake to go defraud a company to steal the hard work of others so your own illicit company can turn a profit off said labor by others irks me.

I'm sorry, I really don't understand this. What part of the second statement doesn't apply to the first?

You give it away for free instead.

ad revenue

Diane Greene left Google over two years ago.

> cost savings compared to life imprisonment

Minor nitpick: it's actually more expensive to execute someone than to imprison them for life, mostly because of the increased legal costs.

But isn’t that a cost that could be eliminated with efficiency. It seems the legal costs are a result of the moral differences of population segments.

If this different went away and everyone had the same morality, the legal costs would be really low.

That's interesting, do you have a source for that? A quick Google search turns up aircraft, machinery, and agricultural products (and doesn't mention garbage), but I'd be curious to learn more.

> For more than five years, scrap and trash has consistently been the US’s biggest export

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/05/09/china...

And it is likely to be more as trash is often declared as raw plastic, cellulose, aluminium billets, or "electronic components" to evade numerous bans that China been enacting over the last decade.

This is also why American own material statistics by US ITC is likely a better measure (access to ITC data is paid)

That article doesn't contain the quoted line. However, it does contain the following line:

>Since 2007, one of America's top exports to China has been... trash

Assuming positive intent, it is possible that the article was edited in the five hours since you linked it. However, it was written in 2013 so that seems unlikely.

I was homed onto the link by https://qz.com/82640/china-doesnt-want-your-trash-anymore-an... the quote is from there. Did not notice that it wasn't from the original article.

It probably is by volume.

Lots of otherwise empty containers going back. Makes sense to jam them with junk when the ship has to be repatriated anyway.

> 2.3. Don’t name your variables for their types

What's the best way to handle a situation where you use two different types for the same data? e.g.

  var usersMap map[string]*User
  var usersList []*User

How about describing the intended use of the collections? E.g.

    var usersByUsername map[string]*User
    var usersToEmail []*User

I’d call the former usersByID (if that’s what the string is)

You could use a struct with private fields, e.g.

  type Users struct{
    dict map[string]*User
    list []*User
  }

and attach methods to both access the data and coordinatedly update both forms, e.g.

  func (us *Users) byID(id string) *User { ... }
  func (us *Users) sortedByID() []*User { ... }
  func (us *Users) addUser(id string, nu *User) {
    dict[id] = nu
    list = append(list, nu)
    ...
  }

Personally I'd use usersByID and users - I nearly always name my maps thingsByKey, and my default is that a plural thing on its own is nearly always a list, so adding a suffix of List doesn't add anything much here for me (Cheney's "Don’t name your variables for their types").

> No bus lanes that I'm aware of, or at least few enough that a multiple-time visitor didn't see them, so buses are stuck in general traffic.

No bus lanes, but buses aren't just stuck in general traffic. Portland has a system that gives them priority at stoplights: https://www.oregonlive.com/commuting/2016/03/what_are_the_bl...

That's interesting, and good, but it's hardly a substitute for dedicated lanes, let alone separated-grade lanes. A bus with signal priority can still get slowed down by and stuck in traffic when there are flat out too many cars around.

The third variant of the problem (where one prisoner is allowed to make one change, which can guarantee that every prisoner survives) is the one I heard first; I like that problem because it seems even more counter-intuitive, but also makes it easier to understand why it works.

I love the concept of "a system where people have value independent of their productivity."

I worry that the increasing focus on a meritocracy (especially in tech) ignores the fact that it devalues anyone who for whatever reason -- lack of education, lack of natural ability, or just lack of motivation -- doesn't contribute enough to be considered important. It's probably an improvement on the system we had before, where you were valued for being part of the right community or the right family, but I hope this isn't the end goal, and that we can eventually get to a state where we consider everyone inherently valuable.

The basic problem is that meritocracy beats every other political system. The reason meritocracy took over is not because it is morally better, but because non-meritocatic societies fell by the wayside under the boot of meritocracy.

Hopefully in the post-scarcity society coming we can come up with a better approach not focused on people’s productivity.

Meritocracy is not a political system. Even calling it an economic system is questionable, but at least it comes close. And yes, the difference does matter. Failure to understand the proper relationship between politics and economics is one of the chief causes of the malaise people try to escape with opiates.