code_code

I've had the thought that programmers should note assumptions in flagged comments, and those comments should be automatically collected, and then reviewed occasionally. Assumptions might be sustainable, so to speak, but they can also create one kind of technical debt.

I've generally wondered about extensions for RTOS support. Special kinds of priority-encoders off registers for flags; shared-memory locks; -- that sort of thing.

I forget the name of the other famous physicist (not Dyson) who said it, but the quote was: "I've seen more [persons] destroyed by Physics than by drugs".

I don't regret my Ph.D., but I still remember the monotone voice in which I defended my dissertation. Listen to advice here. Powerlessness is quite something to experience when one is (has been) locked in for years.

I first read the title as Waterfail Process. I need new glasses and less confirmation bias.

Tab will be a printable shape.

Even decades ago I gave such reported concern with photographs more credence than the typical western account of it. I also wondered if the translation was precise enough -- could it (in some cases) have reflected a concern with "essence" more generally? Even without reference to a soul the concern can be a bit immaterial.

Likewise "nuclear plant phenomenology".

I have a recent note that says (from HN id=21495338), try makepad.github.io/makepad . My recollection is that this is such an example.

I've only looked at web components casually, but the examples I saw seemed a greater mess than this. Interact DOM components, CSS, slots, JS, private DOM, ... AND plan for late-loading code and resources. ?!

Thanks for your work. I've been re-reading Knuth's _The TeXbook_ as a reminder of fine points in typography. So much can be covered in just provisioning for floating blocks, top-floating blocks, widows and orphans, a few counters, some flexibilty in headers and footers, and such. It seems like you and/or CSS are hitting those high-points.

I hear you emphasizing this might just be for print, but something like a Kindle in-browser reader (hidden nav; spacebar or < or > to turn a page) can also provide a nice experience (different to scrolling) in reading longer works.

I don't have any connection with these folks, but it seems a game changer on projected price, walk-away safety, thorium compatibility, and claimed use of existing materials: moltexenergy.com .

Molten salts in tubes. They claim "cheaper than coal" can be realistic again.

Thoreau: "Read not the Times; read the Eternities. Conventionalities are at length as bad as impurities. Even the facts of science may dust the mind by their dryness, unless they are effaced each morning, or rather rendered fertile by the dews of fresh and living truth."

When important truths can be partial truths, then -- as with the posted article -- we can be bold in their statement.

"Ich bin ein Amerikaner."

An illustration: How I Learned to Cycle Like a Dutchman

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/personal-history/how-i-lea...

In addition to TerraPower, moltexenergy.com desribes another conversation-changer. Not a PWR. Walk-away safe. Molten salt in tubes. Can burn existing waste. Apparently can use Thorium. Projected costs less than coal. Uses existing materials.

This has me believing in nuclear energy again: .. www.moltexenergy.com .. Molten salt in tubes. Walk-away safe. Economics estimated cheaper than coal. Can burn existing wastes. Uses existing materials.