I'm looking to kickstart a simple python microservice template that:
- Spins up a pair of EC2s (some security group details)
- Deploys the microservice and dependencies (via custom image, packer, dockerized container, whatever)
- Terraform scripts for prod vs test
- Best efforts via supervisord (or whatever) to restart the python process if it dies
- Prefer Gitlab CI/CD pipeline
- Would be great if could drop to packet.net as well as AWS (just a nice-to-have)
Would like this to be a starting place for quickly building "production-ish" python services, and am 110% happy with it being open source forever.
Looking for freelancer to convert some reasonably math heavy matlab scripts to python. (numpy/scipy) Domain is controls with focus on kalman filtering particularly UKFs.
Yeah -- my gut intuition is that this would be a GREAT opp for custodians of shares. (Your shell contract example basically)
You'd buy huge tranches of companies and swap out synthetic exposure to secondary investors who want just temporary directional risk in these companies. Modeling the relative value of the true shares and synthetic shares would be interesting/fun.
1. I hate paying so much for a house, this is ridiculous, they need to build more supply.
2. I bought a house for some ridiculous price anyways.
3. I'm now fucked if more supply is added. Vote against any proposition that adds more units to the city.
4. Go to my job where I make the world a better place.
I just moved to the bay area from a large urban center. I live in the far away surburbs right now (Sunnyvale). It's kind of incredible to me how flat and sprawled out everything is. There are almost no buildings taller than 2-3 floors.
The bay area has a housing crisis, and it needs to grow vertically. There should be tall apartment buildings being built, especially in the suburbs, there's plenty of space. It's pretty clear that the bay area refuses to grow, because of political reasons, which are often selfish as you pointed out.
IMO, the inevitable outcome is that tech will slowly relocate to other areas that are more willing to accomodate (and perhaps welcome) the growth. I think it's already started.
Density helps. But environmental issues help more. There are only so many viable locations for large-scale hydro storage, and it always means drowning some valley. Just building a set of rails up a hill is much less environmentally invasive.
One of the biggest wins of this model, really, is the low environmental impact, relative to hydro or batteries. Fewer regulatory hurdles, more potential locations. But in the end, cost effectiveness is what will win, and to some degree, that will be location-dependent. Is there geography we can exploit? Will it be in a populated area? What's the proximity to wind or solar farms?
Solving the storage problem in a cost-effective way is the key to transitioning from poison fuels to clean power. Once it's cheaper than coal/LNG/nuclear, the world will switch over quickly.
Rocks have about 4 times the density of water, thus you'll need 1/4 of the volume of a reservoir to hold as much energy. Since pilling trains is much more expensive than holding water, I can assure you this project will use much more land area than an equivalent lake.
Also, this thing requires a straight line high inclination slope and plain areas both up and down. I don't know how that compares with high walled valleys, but it is not a very common formation in nature. All said, it may be useful because it uses a different kind of landscape from water storage, so it can increase the total capacity.
Anyway, I agree, costs alone will say how much of it is created.
We’re a seasoned team of nerds leveraging math and tech opportunities in spot and derivatives markets.
We’re looking for an FPGA dev quite familiar with low level networking to help build pretty quick things.
reach out to: jrg |at| kitsunecap [dot] com