working for polymarket should be understood as loosely morally equivalent to, like, being paid to sell heroin (and nothing else) to 8 year olds (and nobody else)

Truly wild this hasn't been keeping up with inflation since 2007.

I don't even have any direct investment in businesses in Portland, but I do want people to be able to succeed here. This seems like a great push.

turning peel was amazing, and I still really need to try lovely's.

I get pizza thief almost every time I do a long run in forest park, so I truly can't tell if it's good or if I'm just starving 😅

claude code is bourgeoisie super meat boy

TERMS AND CONDITIONS APPLY, "GOOD", "BAD", AND "PEOPLE" ARE LEFT UNDEFINED AS EXERCISES FOR THE READER

do you think good things happen to good people and bad things happen to bad people

Pacific Power Strays Further Away From 100% Clean Last year, regulators found that Pacific Power did not have a plan to meet emission reduction requirements. Now, the utility has doubled down on its faulty plan. This time, it has moved further away…

From what I've been able to identify: the only "punishment" for straying from the emission reduction goals has been procedural, in the form of "you need to do better... or else".

There is no material carrot, there is no material stick.

I have some guesses.

- It's incredibly vague - the standard to meet the 2030 target was "continual progress"
- the enforcement/incentives have also been vague - there has been no financial penalty nor incentive offered to Pacificorp or PGE

(please correct me if have a source otherwise)

... and on this note, I'm also in support of nuclear power in Oregon - but only if regulated to a sufficient degree of safety.

And unconditional opposition to nuclear power on the basis "that it could go poorly" would also be a huge opportunity cost

I can weirdly see some similarities between these massive DC pushes and something like a nuclear reactor

- If regulated well, and operational: Could provide a valuable resource for a local community
- If regulated/executed poorly: Could destroy you and everything you love

high risk / high reward

Yeah, if by "marginal DC" you mean "DC that would not be willing to pay for externalities imposed via regulation" - that makes sense.

It does seem like this is an industry so flush with cash that it *could* be redirected towards hitting clean energy targets. but only if forced in that direction.

County Scrambles to Save Immunization Programs as Federal Funding Runs Out

Trump's presidency has NOT helped, but this funding crisis started when Biden was in office.

The funding issues for these programs are local. Ensuring that industries flock to Oregon, provide jobs, and stay here - while paying their share in taxes for the community - can literally save lives

Even if someone in the PNW chooses to ignore national trends, and look locally (a risky move for an infectious disease) Oregon's childhood vaccination rate is "below average, below what's necessary, and getting worse".

This trend SHOULD be worrying! Kids lives are at stake - and we can do better!

- CDC marks 95% population vaccination rate as "enough for herd immunity"
- National vaccination rate for kindergartners is 92%
- Oregon kindergartners have a 90% vaccination rate, and the vaccination rate has been falling every year for about that past decade

Anyway for the rest of you: get vaccinated

Unfortunately, for:

- Immunocompromised kids with cancer
- Babies too young for MMR vaccines
- The 3% of people for whom the vaccine has low efficacy,

Officials say "get fucked"

I hear you that the implementation matters more than anything, but dang it sucks to hear "we can't regulate therefore a pretty fundamental industry should not exist in this state".

These regulations matter a lot! I also don't want DCs to run amok, but getting this right matters

Tiered pricing is possible! And charging exponentially more to a customer who is using exponentially more creates an incentive to be as efficient as possible, while also providing a funding source for building more infrastructure

I totally understand that offering taxpayer money to hyper capitalist DCs as incentive is a shit deal - and I also think it's 100% right to make them pay for their fair share of resource usage.

But the rhetoric around "DCs/servers are inherently evil" confuses me.

As long as data centers pay for their externalities (power, water, etc) and comply with local laws - do you truly believe they're a terrible land use choice?

You are posting through a server hosted in a DC right now. If that DC pays its business/property taxes, why the hate?

golang enthusiasts be like "check out our cute mascot"

the mascot:

All to say: I wish we could live in a world where these behaviors were at least documented, but it feels like something more is necessary for validation here - otherwise it's way too easy for non-local effects to slip by unintentionally with deeply nested futures

Like this is way more complex than "you're using a Tokio object with a semaphore" - that dependency bubbles up in the stack of all futures in the await chain, and they'd all need to be aware of this dependency too - they're part of it.

I feel so conflicted about this. I really want to agree with the idea that dependencies between futures should be known, documented, hell maybe even validated for safety. But I also fear that the easy composition of futures and lack of existing spec here makes this really hard to retrofit

Yeah, completely agree with you here. I think that if "futures are always either polled or cancelled" progress gets made either way, but that view is too simplified -- so you're right, knowing about what dependencies exist between other futures matters a lot.

Two futurelock ingredients:

- Polling (then not polling) a future
- Dependencies between futures

Tokio Mutexes are only one such example of dependencies between futures, but many others exist.

For what it's worth: I actually *don't* think this problem is inherent (or exclusive, depending on your take) with Tokio Mutexes.

If this code was using a tokio::sync::mpsc, it could easily hit the same issue!

(Not really saying I'd be opposed to changing the internal semaphore usage in tokio - just trying to explain why we focused much more on "how the caller is juggling the polling of futures" instead)

It was hard to argue that the inter-future dependency was "wrong", because dependencies between futures exist (inside and outside tokio), and seem incredibly difficult to rule out across a codebase.

Ultimately if a future with dependencies is "polled, then not polled", can the scheduler do much?

when we've discussed this at oxide in the context of futurelock, we've described the problem as a combination of "lack of polling" + "dependencies" between future. A semaphore with FIFO access is one such dependency.