They're limiting it in software then disabling the limit on first use.

Forever watching people reinvent CSS classes for no reason. (I appreciate that this article actually does show doing it with classes, but it's still grating to me that these "frameworks" just keep reinventing style="...")

This was written by ai, right?

Reduce is harder to read. Maps and filters are deeply simple. The problem space a reduce can solve is, I'm pretty sure, strictly larger than both of them. Its generality is its downfall.

I'll happily use a reduce, but it has to be either as a well named function or immediately stored in a well named variable. If the reduce is complex enough that you can't name it, that's a smell to me, reach for a different tool.

tldr: you don't, but you might think you do

I think BP popularized the idea in order to allow people to blame each other instead of the real perpetrators, people who knew they were destroying the planet decades ago and engaged in a well documented and persistent campaign to sow fear, uncertainty, and doubt in any movement that would halt their crimes.

The idea of a carbon footprint was a gift from heaven for them as, under the weight of overwhelming evidence, they stopped being able to fight the idea that it was happening. Now they had to convince us all that the most ineffective possible strategy was the truth. Not only does the idea of personal responsibility for structural evils blind us to better strategies, it also conveniently polarises the issue, making people feel judged and pushing them away from the actual truth that climate change is very real, very deadly, and extraordinarily solvable with structural change.

I would have preferred we had the global political will to solve it decades ago by having a plan to ban the use of fossil fuels over a reasonable period (or some such), but we're well past that world, and I now have hope that the economics of renewables will force the world's hand, as they're simply a cheaper option and continually getting moreso. That is to say I would have preferred the structural change be by the will of the people, but it seems it will have to be by the will of capital.

Whilst they didn't invent it, BP put a lot of money into popularising the idea of a carbon footprint. It is a lie of a concept that blames the powerless for the actions of the powerful.

Do what you can to fight climate change, do what you can to reduce your emissions, but actions that can influence policy are a thousand times more important than any amount of reduction you can make in your own carbon footprint.

A shower that takes cold water from the mains and heats it with electricity. Common as muck in the UK.

If it's an electric shower, you can do what a salamander pump does and add some detection wires on the shower box's on-switch. I appreciate you don't want wires around the shower but it's a fully direct "is the shower on" detector and the wires are technically in the shower rather than around it.

Today's episode of "let's correlate two things that obviously just correlate with lacking money"

Yes, then. This has slop vibes all over it.

Link the actual paper as published in a peer reviewed journal.

Is that graph AI generated?