While I love ECS you're not giving k8s enough credit. Nearly every COTS (common off the self) app has a helm chart, hardly any provide direct ECS support. If I want a simple kafka cluster or zookeeper cluster there's a supported helm chart for that, nothing is provided for ECS, you have to make that yourself.
Not even close to ChatGPT :/ Bard essentially ignores a good chunk of the prompt which is the most important (generating the anki formatted card that you can directly copy and paste).
"create an anki deck of the top 5 brazilian portuguese verbs and the top 5 tenses. The format should be like the one below (but adding one line for the 5th verb tense). An explanation of the tense and an example sentence should be included. Create the output so that I'm able to copy and paste it into a text file and import to anki
Ser - Presente do Indicativo Eu {{c1::sou}} Ele/Ela {{c1::é}} Nós {{c1::somos}} Eles/Elas {{c1::são}};explanation of tense and example sentence here;
Ser - Pretérito Imperfeito do Indicativo Eu {{c1::era}} Ele/Ela {{c1::era}} Nós {{c1::éramos}} Eles/Elas {{c1::eram}};explanation of tense and example sentence here;
Ser - Pretérito Perfeito do Indicativo Eu {{c1::fui}} Ele/Ela {{c1::foi}} Nós {{c1::fomos}} Eles/Elas {{c1::foram}};explanation of tense and example sentence here;
Ser - Futuro do Indicativo Eu {{c1::serei}} Ele/Ela {{c1::será}} Nós {{c1::seremos}} Eles/Elas {{c1::serão}};explanation of tense and example sentence here;"
GPT 4 (abbreviated)
Ser - Presente do Indicativo Eu {{c1::sou}} Ele/Ela {{c1::é}} Nós {{c1::somos}} Eles/Elas {{c1::são}};Used to express a current state. Example: "Eu sou estudante." (I am a student.);
Ser - Pretérito Imperfeito do Indicativo Eu {{c1::era}} Ele/Ela {{c1::era}} Nós {{c1::éramos}} Eles/Elas {{c1::eram}};Used for ongoing or habitual actions in the past. Example: "Ele era professor." (He used to be a teacher.);
Ser - Pretérito Perfeito do Indicativo Eu {{c1::fui}} Ele/Ela {{c1::foi}} Nós {{c1::fomos}} Eles/Elas {{c1::foram}};Used for actions completed in the past. Example: "Nós fomos amigos." (We were friends.);
Ser - Futuro do Indicativo Eu {{c1::serei}} Ele/Ela {{c1::será}} Nós {{c1::seremos}} Eles/Elas {{c1::serão}};Expresses a future action or state. Example: "Ela será médica." (She will be a doctor.);
Ser - Presente do Subjuntivo Que eu {{c1::seja}} Que ele/ela {{c1::seja}} Que nós {{c1::sejamos}} Que eles/elas {{c1::sejam}};Used for wishes, doubts, or hypotheticals. Example: "Espero que você seja feliz." (I hope you are happy.);
Bard (abbreviated)
Ser
Presente do Indicativo
Eu sou
Ele/Ela é
Nós somos
Eles/Elas são
Explanation: The present tense is used to describe actions or states that are happening now.
Example sentence: Eu sou estudante. (I am a student.)
When those people start paying NYC income tax (which tops at around 4% of income) then I think we should cater more to them BUT they don't. The people who actually in the city and actually have to pay that tax should have their city catered to their likes. No one forces those people to work in NYC an no one forces them to drive. The vast majority of commuters outside of NYC take public transportation. People can either pay the toll or take public transportation.
We in NJ who work in NY already pay income taxes to NY state even if we don't reside in the boroughs.
Instead of charging me $15 more to visit, go have Adams ask Hotchul for money if you want to reach further into my pocket.
But you can't, because NYC can't elect competent representatives. De Blasio, really? Adams' recent scandal? Just have someone who can negotiate with their own goddamn party.
This will actually make living here more attractive. Most people who actually live in the city do not drive, we take public transportation. I don't want to sound condescending but we'd prefer our city to be catered to people who actually live here instead of people who are just visiting. Hopefully this will free up more space for pedestrian zones and bike lanes.
NYC is currently optimized for extreme density, with a huge flow of commuters into offices that now are mostly empty. If you want it to turn back into lower density housing, you'll have to find a way to trim back expenses to the point where the debt loads of the city are sustainable.
Without the tax income from all those offices, and the surrounding shops, etc., NYC is unsustainable. It's been that way for a while, reality is catching up.
The vast majority of workers commute on public transportation. NYC is extremely accessible via public transportation. Catering the city to cars isn't scalable.
I'm sorry but this isn't indicative of the reality of driving in NYC. If you drive into NYC, you will have to park. When you park you'll need to pay for a lot or a garage. Daily parking in NYC can cost $50-100, monthly subscriptions can easily run over $500. Even if the unlikely happens and you find a parking meter those are $10 an hour. Poor people aren't driving into NYC, they're commuting on trains like everyone else. It should also be noted the congestion fee is for driving into Manhattan, not around.
Not sure how this is relevant. There is a point where $100+$15 is too much and simply people can't afford more than that.
So this is about pricing people out of coming in. It doesn't matter WHY they need to be there. If you have no money? GTFO.
Then if you say this has nothing to do with the poverty, then in that case, how is it going to reduce the congestion?
"Congestion as in there is too many poor entering the Manhattan, so they set the fee so only those who can afford $15 can enter."
You said that will adversely affect the poor but that's not true, what poor person is spending $100 a day on parking? Poor people use trains like nearly everyone else does. The extra $15 will discourage people from making unnecessary trips into the city thus reducing traffic/congestion and improving quality of life for people who live in the city.
For instance if someone live in Brooklyn and needs to make a trip to lower Manhattan they'll be more likely to use public transportation.
Poverty is relative. Someone may be compensated well enough to afford rent, parking and all that, but after paying everything they have little money left for themselves. That $15 may eat into this meaning you may reconsider whatever arrangement you have - effectively pricing you out.
> The extra $15 will discourage people from making unnecessary trips into the city thus reducing traffic/congestion and improving quality of life for people who live in the city.
How is that going to do that? If someone is affluent, I don't think they are going to think twice about spending $15 extra. It will discourage people who cannot afford it.
> For instance if someone live in Brooklyn and needs to make a trip to lower Manhattan they'll be more likely to use public transportation.
Yes, people who can't afford spending $15. Anyone else will continue as they do, as private transport is safer, quicker and more convenient - plus there will be better traffic, as the poor will be taken off the road.
> Yes, people who can't afford spending $15. Anyone else will continue as they do, as private transport is safer, quicker and more convenient - plus there will be better traffic, as the poor will be taken off the road.
This isn't true most of the time is quicker to take public transportation due to the congestion issues. Cars don't scale.
> How is that going to do that? If someone is affluent, I don't think they are going to think twice about spending $15 extra. It will discourage people who cannot afford it.
Yes the point is to discourage people from driving into Lower Manhattan. Lower Manhattan is easily accessible by public transportation.
> Poverty is relative. Someone may be compensated well enough to afford rent, parking and all that, but after paying everything they have little money left for themselves. That $15 may eat into this meaning you may reconsider whatever arrangement you have - effectively pricing you out.
The poverty rate for NYC is $35,000 if someone can afford to pay $24,000 yearly in parking I doubt they're in poverty, especially when public transportation is available and is quicker due to the high congestion. This wouldn't be implemented if there wasn't an alternative.
> This isn't true most of the time is quicker to take public transportation due to the congestion issues. Cars don't scale.
If this isn't true then why the need for the charge then?
> Yes the point is to discourage people from driving into Lower Manhattan. Lower Manhattan is easily accessible by public transportation.
Only those who can't afford extra $15.
> The poverty rate for NYC is $35,000 if someone can afford to pay $24,000 yearly in parking I doubt they're in poverty
You are missing the point. Something like this is called wage slavery and many people are affected by it. They earn relatively a lot of money, but after spending on the necessities they have very little money on themselves. Someone can have a job that requires them to travel through the centre or actually park there and despite the high cost they can't afford to quit it because it is better to have some money than nothing. On paper they are doing well, but in reality they are miserable with no way out.
If you know who parks there, they are either at least earning > 2M annually who likely to be benefit from such pricing (gods know who will receive the contract that city awarded from the revenue of congestion pricing), or they are the people has to conduct services in the city. These cost just is going to added the money to normal people like you (assume you are not not owning a penthouse in Manhattan).
This simply isn't true, where is there free parking in Lower Manhattan, on a day other than Sunday? And also you're telling me the poor people are small business owners in NYC?
Out of all of parking in Lower Manhattan maybe 5% is free. And it's still very difficult to get that parking.
It sounds like you’ve never tried to park downtown. I drove, lived and parked daily for free in Manhattan for 6 years
The entire length of Manhattan from below 14th street/above Houston on every single street has free street parking as long as you can comply with the 1.5 hours twice a week that you can not park there. It’s a few choice streets and aves that are the exception to this.
Business owners and employees park in those spots daily because street cleaning hours take place typically before 11AM, so they just drive in and hang out for 10 mins before getting free parking all day.
Ya buddy, go run the numbers on a wash and fold service or any small business with 6-7% cash on cash returns and lmk how much is left at the end of the month to pay $450 for congestion fees.
Clojure's Java interop story is generally really good. Method calls are predictable and uniform. The collection types generally work both ways, rather than being a completely independent type hierarchy (as a former Scala programmer, what a breath of fresh air). Functions work as Runnable, Callable, Comparator, etc. Reify, deftype, and proxy are sufficient for maybe 98% of APIs I've worked with.
There are, however, those rare exceptions! For instance, some Java APIs literally won't work without annotations. There's just no way (last I checked) to express those in Clojure.
I don't remember exactly the nature of this problem, but I've had occasional issues with deeply overloaded argument dispatch before. Maybe it was something like "The Java API expects an object x which responds to x.foo(long l) and also x.foo(int i) differently", and there was no way to convince deftype to emit the right kind of class.
AOT is... it's weird. You want ahead-of-time compilation when, say, you want to write a Java class that uses datatypes defined in Clojure. But AOT, at least in Leiningen, tends to break stuff in truly inscrutable ways. My professional opinion is that it's haunted.
I'm not the most knowledgeable on this, but in general, Clojure has smart ways to convert data types from Java types to Clojure ones. Just like Clojure lets you use functions on a lot of different data types (mapping over vectors, objects, etc), it lets you do the same with Java collections.
Instantiating objects and using their methods is pretty terse and easy when using macros like ->
