This is a remarkably ignorant take. Literally every detail is wrong.
They aren't major chords, they're mostly power chords, which are neither major nor minor (no third and the third provides the major/minor tonality). They often function as minor chords because of the melody or other parts, or just because of how the progression fits together. They aren't unique or new with Cobain, he was part of a long history of punk and rock and roll.
Cobain was a good songwriter in the rock and roll tradition. He was not particularly innovative or doing something technically unheard of, and he wouldn't have claimed to be. He wanted to be a good songwriter, and he succeeded. That's it, don't make up bullshit about it.
> Cobain was a good songwriter in the rock and roll tradition.
He wasn't even that. He was a pretty bad songwriter. His music was by and large mopey, plodding monotonous work that is dreary to listen to. Apart from Smells Like Teen Spirit, I don't think he wrote a single song worth listening to.
How is that new information "challenging old ventilation doctrine"? It confirms old ventilation doctrine: monitoring CO2 remains a good proxy for general air quality, including viral and bacterial threats, and reducing CO2 via ventilation reduces other threats. That's doctrine, and now it has stronger evidence to support it, and another possible explanation for why and how well CO2 is correlated with other air quality issues.
Ventilation good. CO2 bad. No challenge to old ventilation doctrine detected. (The article and the research seems much more nuanced than the silly title.)
The old doctrine was that CO2 was a proxy for air quality, and the (somewhat overblown title) is about seeing CO2 additionally as having a causal effect.
For example, under the "proxy" model, if you're worried about infection risk it's sufficient to filter the air, but under the new model filtering will work less well than you'd expect because the viruses you miss will stay active longer.
"The old doctrine was that CO2 was a proxy for air quality"
That's not accurate, though. CO2 is, on its own, an air quality concern.
It has also been known, or at least part of the conversation, since Florence Nightingale's time, that fresh air reduces infections (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9300299/). This research makes a small tweak to our understanding, but it's also something that's been suspected/suggested by others for decades.
This research isn't "challenging" anything, it's merely expanding our understanding of causation about previously observed correlations. It's good to know what's happening. It's silly to make it out to be something it's not.
Listen. You don't get tenure confirming centuries-known ideas. You get it upending known doctrines. So if your research doesn't upend the doctrine, find a way to make your title say it does
One way it challenges old doctrine is that 1000ppm CO2 was considered good air quality in the past. Now it seems 800ppm or perhaps lower should be considered good air quality. They haven't tested other viruses yet (both colds and flu viruses are now considered airborne I understand, and other respiratory viruses probably are also), and each virus may react differently, so nobody actually knows yet what an optimal value is. It is even possible that the optimal CO2 value is somewhere below the current average concentration of CO2 in the air around the world when taking all airborne viruses into consideration, but nobody knows. More research is needed. But at least for covid, 1000ppm CO2 should probably no longer be considered good air quality (though replication of the study would be good.)
If supermarkets and other public spaces had installed CO2 scrubbers on their ventilation output/exhaust, could we have expected to lower COVID's r-naught?
In what we did over the pandemic with masking, we drove some flu variants extinct. Is this an alternative to accomplish the same effect?
Are hospitals already doing this with existing ventilation?
CO2 scrubbers don't exist in an economically feasible form. Rather the trick is just ventilation, replace indoor air with ourdoor air. If supermarkets and other public spaces just installed ventilation systems that exchanged their indoor air with outdoors air (preferably with heat exchanges so as to avoid air-conditioning or heating the outdoors), it would absolutely have helped. Ignoring this very interesting study, ventilation still just flat out works to reduce the amount of covid in the air.
Increasing ventilation is unsurprisingly recommended by the CDC, the EPA, and basically every other relevant group. The EPA has a list of papers here if you're interested in scientific measurements backing this (but can I also say it's just common sense?): https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/indoor-air-and-co...
Or just the critically undersupported infra fail. The world will not end, and the money will magically appear out of thin air, guaranteed, and the public wouldn't even have to pay for it.
I do realize that living without uber eats/electronic banking/social media for a few days is unfortunately, untenable for the vast majority of the population.
What would motivate its existence if not government?
Google has Project Zero, but it's quite limited in scope, mostly focusing on things in Google's supply chain. What other evidence is there corporations will fund the scale and scope needed to secure the whole ecosystem (that everyone depends on at this point, Open Source won)?
Lots of the security-related organizations that currently exist merely find and report exploits, often even asking for compensation from the maintainer of the software for reporting it (even if it's a bullshit report: https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2024/01/02/the-i-in-llm-stands-f...). Putting more work on volunteers isn't a reasonable ask.
If transparency were taken seriously, that wouldn't be an easy task. And, if it were multi-state, either via multiple states having such an organization or via a collaboration of states and organizations who don't all agree about protecting backdoors for the FBI/CIA/whatever.
I always liked the reddits (Steve and Alexis), but I'm not overly fond of what reddit has become.
And, I fear the beatings will continue until morale improves. I just don't think the incentives are aligned with building a good community, anymore, so there's nothing pushing reddit toward becoming good again and many things pushing toward exploitation of the near two decades of conversation found there.
I work on Virtualmin, and have for nearly two decades; most of that time as both a commercial product and Open Source project. It is an extremely competitive market, and it is a shrinking market. We've had about 150,000 active servers running Virtualmin GPL+Pro (give or take a few thousand) for the past several years, despite some new users fleeing from the cPanel price increases, and despite a major UI overhaul and lots of improvements in that time. The reason cPanel has raised their prices is that the specific market niche is dying and it is a very expensive product to support.
If you haven't found the dozens of direct competitors to cPanel (at least a half-dozen of which are credible substitutes for most users), you haven't done your market research effectively. According to the market data I have seen, Plesk is now the leader in the market, due to pretty effective deals with some of the largest providers. Nearly all of the competitors to cPanel are cheaper, and some are free, including Virtualmin GPL. And, the real problem for cPanel and all the other control panels isn't even the other control panels, it's all the other ways people are building sites and apps. We aren't losing customers to other control panels, generally speaking; we lose them to completely different ways of doing things.
The traditional control panel market is shrinking as more and more people and companies move to cloud native deployments or to services like Squarespace/Wix/WordPress.com/Shopify/etc. Developers have been moving to the cloud, small business has been moving to easier to use site builder type services. Shared and VPS hosting is feeling the squeeze on both sides.
There are opportunities there in both directions, even in easing the transition for people currently on shared or VPS hosting, and it may even be that some of the control panel makers will make that leap, but it's a whole new paradigm. There's not a lot of shared code between what cPanel (or any of the dozens of competitors) does and what a cloud native deployment looks like or the services on the low-end (the SquareSpace/Wix/WordPress.com/Shopify niche) look like. We've been moving in the cloud native direction in Virtualmin for a while, but it's a major undertaking and there is very little immediate benefit to existing customers (and, Cloudmin, despite it's name, is not very cloud native, either). Our customers are not broadly asking for the ability to operate Kubernetes deployments or for the ability to deploy containers to the cloud, for instance. It's a classic innovator's dilemma. Our customers want a faster horse (or, in your case, a cheaper horse), but in five to ten years, most won't want a horse at all.
Also, I think you're (wildly) underestimating the time it will take to build a credible commercial alternative, when there is already so much competition, including several free products in the space. The minimum viable product to compete with cPanel is hundreds of thousands of lines of code. I would not start a commercial product in this space today, or even ten years ago, despite my now decades of experience in it.
Thanks so much for your detailed response. And thanks for your contribution to the space with VirtualMin.
It appears it would be unwise to just build a direct competitor to CPanel, Plesk, etc. Not only would that be short-sighted (given the competitiveness you've highlighted), it would be unnecessary (because control panels don't appear to be required tooling for the people buying cloud infrastructure).
According to Gartner, Cloud IaaS revenue was $90B in 2021, but the combined revenues of CPanel and Plesk in the same year couldn't break $100M (according to data from Datanyze and ZoomInfo). This is a clear signal that those who are buying cloud infrastructure from Amazon, Microsoft, et al. don't have an essential need for these tools. And even at the smaller providers like DigitalOcean, Linode, etc. you'd have to be unreasonable to pay $20 per month for a license to manage a $5 per month droplet; the panel won't even install on a $10 droplet.
It's kind of funny, because the things that can be done on that single droplet/server are incredible. What can't you build? Unfortunately, control panels as they are setup (and have been setup for ages) can't cater to aspirations. People need user-friendly tools they can use to build things on servers; by themselves and/or with others.
You're right about the innovator's dilemma though. Your customers aren't going to tell you what could be, only how 'what currently is' could be a little different. It's going to take some kind of leap, but the companies seemingly thriving in this space may have become too comfortable collecting license fees to make it. Maybe they've seen it (or something like it), but the refactoring cost and mental paradigm shift constitutes too much inertia to overcome their comfort zone without a looming existential calamity staring at them in the face.
'Going to take a crack at it. I have a few ideas I think could work, but I'll never know unless I test them out. There'll be a server management aspect to it, but that's not going to be the main. And I don't think 10 months is too optimistic for an MVP. Again, it's not going to be a CPanel clone; not that many folks really need that.
Is it ok to check in with you later in the process and perhaps bounce a few ideas off?
And, it emulates two SID chips and has multiple modes (6581 and 8580), so it seems like a pretty darned good deal, honestly.
Real SIDs are pretty pricey these days, and they aren't making any more of them, so they will keep climbing in price for as long as people find them interesting. So, it's good to have an alternative.
They aren't major chords, they're mostly power chords, which are neither major nor minor (no third and the third provides the major/minor tonality). They often function as minor chords because of the melody or other parts, or just because of how the progression fits together. They aren't unique or new with Cobain, he was part of a long history of punk and rock and roll.
Cobain was a good songwriter in the rock and roll tradition. He was not particularly innovative or doing something technically unheard of, and he wouldn't have claimed to be. He wanted to be a good songwriter, and he succeeded. That's it, don't make up bullshit about it.