Thanks for the terminology - that makes it easier!
Only very few people have accomplished climbing one of the 14 peaks “alpine style”.
I'm quite ok with that.
If the rockies were 28k instead of 14k then I still don't think there'd be a situation where we hire poor villagers from the outskirts of Denver to put their lives on the line. I really believe the high peaks are summited expedition-style because the poverty makes that practical, which in turn allows many more people to reach the top
But most mountaineers get by without having to hire people to carry their shit for them. Certainly people here in Colorado use guides from time to time, but i've never heard of anyone using a porter. Maybe i'm ignorant, but it seems like mountaineers only use porters in the himalayas because they are cheap and disposable.
Perhaps if you can't summit a mountain without another human to carry your equipment then it should be ok to not summit that mountain.
Sure - and i'm sure I could find people who'd play a game of russian roulette for $1M but it'd be massively unethical to hire people to do that.
So there's obviously some line - as a society we consider it ethical to hire forestry workers or deep sea fishermen even though they have a significantly higher risk of death that most other professions. I think a 25% death rate is just unethical in the extreme, even Everest is something like 1%.
Also I can understand taking that risk for yourself. Certainly it's way outside my comfort zone, but I'm not going to tell someone else they can't do something dangerous. But how can you go out and hire people to help you knowing there's a 25% chance they'll be giving their lives for you?
I'm in Colorado and pay $49.95 for 1000/1000 (though i'm grandfathered in and i think it's $69.95 for new users). There's another ISP that offers the same at $70, or i can get 1200/35 cable for about $60.
I can get 2500/2500 for $149 and 10000/10000 for $249 (from my municipal provider) or I can get 6000/6000 for $300 (from the cable provider).
Round here it's all government run. The city runs power, water, sewer, phone, internet, trash/recycle/compost.
We've got the second fastest internet in the country (and it's free for low income people), our power gets an American Public Power Diamond rating for reliability, we're (mostly) on track for being 100% renewable power by 2030, the city captures and liquifies the methane from the sewage treatment process and uses it to run the garbage trucks (that say "Powered by You" on them) and our rates for all of that are cheaper than commercial providers.
Amazingly we still run into people who live here, know all that and still believe that the government is incapable of running anything well... it's kind of startling.
Still, that makes a bit more sense for why you have a generator and that then pretty much requires you have a UPS - so i get it.
Totally agree. I think the lack of mixed zoning is fucking weird about this country. When I lived in edinburgh I was upstairs from a bar and an indian restaurant - but where I live now it's almost a mile to get to any kind of retail or dining.
I was also reminded in a recent story about revitalizing downtowns that lots of asian cities have all kinds of stuff inside high-rise buildings. Like you'd got a noodle restaurant that was on the third floor of a random building in hong kong. But the US seems to practically require that they be entirely office space.
Yeah that seems kinda crazy to me too. I've lived in my current house for 8 years and the only time the power has gone out was when a vehicle crashed into one of the distribution boxes by the road. Our power and internet come from the same provider so it was a double whammy for several hours.
But I suppose it depends where you are - i worked at a place that had two independent power feeds from two different cities, massive UPSs to run the datacenter for 10 minutes and then two redundant diesel generators with several months of fuel on site. I still saw that go down twice in my time there.
Sure - but you've got to start somewhere. There are a lot of people who aren't experienced sys admins who are buying raspberry pis or arduinos and they are probably really good candidates for self-hosting some of their services. I was surprised to find my neighbor (who's a PM with a physical security system company) trying to do something with chatGPT, at first I was a little dismissive because i figured she was just typing prompts into the website, but in reality she was having issues with the python bindings and getting her virtual environments straight. If you can get to that point, you can surely self host stuff.
I run git locally for some of my projects and that was trivial to set up - I think anyone who's used github would have comparable skills to self host gogs or gitea.
Certainly it's somewhat expensive, but people spend a lot of cloud hosted services too. I'm sure in my house we're dropping over $100/month on dropbox, chatgpt, google, adobe and probably a half-dozen smaller ones.
I run a bunch of stuff on Docker on my Synology NAS. It's not quite plug and play but at it's best it's quite within the realm of someone who's got some computer skills. At it's worst though it can suck up a lot of time. I enjoy that kind of stuff when it's not mission critical but I used paid cloud services at work for things that I run for free at home - precisely because I don't want to be the one dealing with downtime in an emergency situation.
I suppose, but it seems like dropping COD altogether would be great
I have no idea, but hiring someone for a job that has a 1 in 20 chance of killing them seems fundamentally immoral - especially given the massive financial imbalance.
It's certainly a good philosophical question though