That was also my immediate thought. However, what was the chance that the method they did use would end up not working? If sufficiently low, from an EV perspective, perhaps they made the right choice? Also the article isn't clear to what extent the lean is responsible for the building not being finished.
You think they could sell a single unit in a tilted highrise? I don't see how risking your entire investment to save a few million with any significant chance of total failure could be +EV.
> If sufficiently low, from an EV perspective, perhaps they made the right choice?
They made the wrong choice. The thing about statistical probability is there’s eventually a right answer - a 1 in X chance collapses into an outcome. They may have made a defensible choice given what they knew at the time, but we now know it was the wrong one.
(That said, I doubt the choice was a good one at the time, either. Wikipedia notes the expected construction budget at $273M, so for ~2% of the cost of the project, they sank the whole thing.)
This is also a problem if they don’t have good oversight: the developers often cut corners or build something which will look good when they’re selling units but costs more to maintain.
The issue isn’t that the developers cut corners though. The best designed roads just aren’t going to last long enough to change the math.
It’s also not the developers job to consider the long term maintenance and tax implications of these developments. That’s the responsibility of the city itself through plan approval and zoning.
That helps with storage, but still is larger than a bigint, and doesn't help with the random distribution of data. I believe newer versions of MySQL have a data type for this.
MySQL doesn't have a UUID type, nor 128-bit int type. But MySQL 8 does provide functions UUID_TO_BIN and BIN_TO_UUID, which make it trivial to convert between the human-readable string representation of a UUID and the more efficient BINARY(16) representation.
MariaDB now has a native UUID column type as of MariaDB 10.7. This is brand new -- 10.7 had its RC release in Nov, not GA yet but very soon I'd imagine.
If you use a type1 UUID, you shouldn't have quite so random distribution, particularly if there's only a single machine generating the UUIDs (which admittedly, kind of misses the point, but alas is done all the time).
Well, you probably shouldn't cluster on a UUID, but it's not really a great idea to blindly cluster on a sequential id, either. You should cluster based on how you query the data to minimize I/O.
Yes, exactly. That means that (assuming there are no other gender-dependent birth factors; this is not true but serves to make the point), we should expect to see slightly more females born than males. The 'surplus' females being born to mothers who were stressed enough that, had they conceived a male, the child would have self-aborted. Thus, assuming stress is correlated with divorce, those families are more likely to divorce.
Then how can you explain no correlation before the daughter has become a teenager? If I understood you correctly, you suggest that parents of daughters divorce more often because the daughter was born to a couple of stressed parents (which is more likely to happen than a boy born to that family). If that would be the only cause of the divorce (I'm oversimplyfying, of course), then there would be no difference whether the daughter is a teenager or not. Perhaps parents think of taking care of a child in their first years of life as a moral obligation, which would reduce the divorce rate. However, it's still suspicious that the divorce occurs around the time the daughter reaches puberty, not some time earlier (after she's 5 or something).
> If I understood you correctly, you suggest that parents of daughters divorce more often because the daughter was born to a couple of stressed parents
I don't. I was specifically responding to yellowbeard's comment, which read:
> Childless parents as a result of self aborting male fetuses would not show up in the study.
Yellowbeard provided one explanation for the fact that, despite male fetuses being more likely to self-abort, there is no difference between divorce stats of young male and female children. My response said why that explanation was wrong. I wasn't saying that the self-abortion delta affects divorce ratios, only that it might.
(Indeed, I do expect that it does have an effect, but that that effect is miniscule and unlikely to be measurable.)
This doesn’t effect the result. They are comparing people with children. If you didn’t have children or aborted a child it’s the same as not getting married. You simply aren’t part of the study because you are irrelevant for the same reason that a kangaroo is irrelevant to the study.
A disproportionate amount of parents with first born daughters over sons is inconsequential because they are measuring the percentage of divorces for each population, not the total number of divorces for each population.
The logic she uses here is really far fetched and unlikely to be true so you really need statistical causal links in order to say anything substantial. I mean her disclosure also discloses a possible bias. She may not have the ability to admit that she her self was the causal factor in her own parents divorce.
I think this can also be problematic. Long lived code _must_ work, which is good. However, it can also live a long time for bad reasons. I have seen long lived code that only lives a long time because it is so complicated that no one can understand how it works, or written in a way that is very hard to change. So it lives a long time, because no one wants to take the time or effort to touch it. Finally, when it _must_ be changed to support a new feature, it might require a full rewrite.
It's also amazing how little land is needed to grow enough food to live on. One person can be fed from around 9 square meters. In dense cities people may not have that much land, but in many areas, people do have that much land in their yards.
If you grew potatoes you’d get 15000-45000 calories out of 9 sq meters. Not enough. 9mX9m (81sqm) and at the high end of yield you could get above starvation.
At least in the UK, I thought you could only harvest potatoes once a year? There is a 2-week school holiday in October, which in some parts of Scotland are still referred to as the "tattie holidays", because that's when the potatoes are harvested (I did it as a kid, it was back-breaking work...).
