There is also a tight correlation between swimming skills and economic class. Reasonable access to a pool or natural water body is not a given, as you point out. Even if you're reasonably close to one of those, sufficient regular time to teach your kid to swim is a luxury. That leaves swimming lessons, which cost money. Access is the main problem, particularly in urban areas.

A related aspect that I experienced was that public pools were typically cold enough that my kids did not enjoy them much. Private swimming schools keep their pools quite warm.

Not really access, but interest. The YMCA offers swimming lessons easily within reach of poor families that want them. A subset of the population just thinks it’s useless.

I disagree, YMCA lessons are not accessible. First off, you don't know what level your child is, and I remember being stressed trying to read our Ys website to understand what the levels meant. This is important because 2, the classes fill very quickly. You have to know what you want and sign up as soon as they're available. And finally, the classes are at very specific times, which certainly do not work for all working parents schedules. For example, it will just be tue or Thur at 5:45pm. If you can't make that you are SOL.

Put them at the lowest level if you don’t know. That’s easy.

As far as schedule goes, who’s taking care of the kid? At age 3 or 4 when you do this, it’s not like they are in school so some adult has to be around at 5:45pm.

Look, I'm telling you this from my perspective as someone who tried to do the exact thing you're saying. If those things stressed me out as an adult who knows about swimming, and crucially prevented me from signing up my kids for swimming lessons at the Y, then it is going to be even more true for people who are low income and not knowledgeable. These are real barriers. Acting like they're not is just putting our collective head in the sand and letting the problem perpetuate.

Your barrier sounds like some other anxiety issue unrelated to economic status.

You know how important swimming lessons are and yet just gave up and skipped it entirely? Or are you actually privileged and had other swimming lesson options for your kid and just didn’t want to bother with the affordable system’s constraints?

Lots of lower middle class/poor including me when I was growing up went to this without a problem. 25 cent public bus ride with mom was an adventure

How long are you from being poor? Are you poor now? Did you raise a child while poor within the last 5 years?

Public bus rides in my area are 9x your cost, and 4x that cost for elderly people.

Public bus rides cost proportionately the same to min wage in California if that helps.

The Y and the bus haven’t turned into upscale things if that’s the point you’re trying to make.

I think this is a much more accurate characterization, especially in AutoTempest's case. Their experience on mobile has always been slow and glitchy. I'm not sure what makes their web "app" so heavy, but it's very noticeable.

Can you share details? Or feel free to email me directly, nathan at autotempest. I'd like to learn more about your device, browser, and search criteria so we can try and reproduce what you described.

My take is that video game devs learn to aspire to cinema, since they're both making "entertainment art that exists on a screen" and cinema is more widely accepted as art among the intelligentsia (not that I agree).

If it were named anything else besides "moneyball," the take about it glorifying underpaying players wouldn't exist.

I'm not old enough to remember a pre-moneyball world, but MLB has been mitigating the effects of the “three true outcomes” problem quite well over the last few years. The pitch clock is the best thing to happen to baseball since integration.

There's a pitch clock now? So much for the Jamie Moyer rule that "the game doesn't start til I start it."

It's been around for a few years now. Games went from averaging around 3 hours to averaging 2.5. The long tail of 3.5-4.5 hour games were basically eliminated. The only time that happens now is if you get extra innings, high pitch counts, and lots of plate appearances that don't end in outs -- in other words, longer games are long because they're good!

Occasionally an old head will grumble about it, but even the old guys tend to be pretty happy about the pitch clock.

> Every type contributes to a cost on the instruction cache, meaning that if your program parses a lot of different types, it will essentially flush your instruction cache any time you enter a parser. Worse still, if a parse involves enough types, the parser itself will hit instruction decoding throughput issues.

Interesting. This makes me wonder how nanopb would benchmark against the parsers shown in the graphs. nanopb's whole schtick is that it's pure C99 and it doesn't generate separate parsing functions for each message. nanopb is what a lot of embedded code uses, due to the small footprint.

Have you ever actually used a long-life incandescent lightbulb? They suck. It's like your bedroom is lit by the miserable little lamp in your oven. That's because Tungsten lighting has inherent tradeoffs between life span, and every other desirable characteristic. Brightness, spectral quality, and energy efficiency all improve as you make the filament thinner, and thus less durable.

The Phoebus cartel is an example of planned obsolescence, but it's a bad example for your argument because it made lightbulbs much, much better at their intended purpose. Consumer number-gawking incentivized manufacturers to make their product objectively worse, and the cartel solved that problem.

No I haven't - has anyone? It sounds like you have, so I won't argue. I am no expert on what the actual consumer impact of the Phoebus Cartel was, maybe it wasn't a great choie of example. Wikipedia doesn't make it sound positive for consumers overall:

> Regulators in the UK and some independent engineers have noted that there are benefits to shorter bulb lifespans, as shorter-life bulbs can be brighter for the same wattage. Nevertheless, both internal comments from cartel executives and later findings by a US court suggest that the cartel's direct motivation for the change was to increase profits by forcing customers to buy bulbs more frequently.

...yes? There are countless ways it could have been implemented that would have been more effective, and less irritating for billions of people. Force companies to respect the DNT header. Ta-daa, done. But that wouldn't have been profitable, so instead let's cook up a cottage industry of increasingly obnoxious consent banners.

I think the closest thing you'll get to an origin story is this: https://100r.co/site/why_a_boat.html

I'll defer to Occam's Razor: they probably had enough money at the outset that they don't have to worry about consistent month-to-month income.

That's not meant to be a diss. Though, given their politics, I could understand if they took it that way.

You're right, but if all it can do is create and display output, then how will any of the oligarchs betting the farm on LLMs actually fulfill the breathless promises they've made?

> people immediately notice that the UI looks different and immediately panic as to how to achieve their current tasks

This was probably a bigger problem 10 years ago than it is now. Plenty of people never do anything at all with their computer besides opening a browser. No matter what OS you use, "click the Chrome logo" still applies.

I've watched my grandparents use a computer. I guarantee I could swap out Windows for KDE or Cinnamon and, as long as I make the wallpaper the same and I put the Chrome icon in the same place, they wouldn't notice anything had changed. I'm not actually going to do that, because then I become the only person in the family who can tame their computer if it starts acting out, but still.

Also, Microsoft's own UI isn't a steady target. Windows 11 is, dare I say it, more akin to Plasma 6 than it is to Windows 7.