I disagree - they've kept the pipeline closed since mid last year under (probably false) argument that they cannot repair a turbine due to sanctions, which has been denied by the companies that handle the repairs. So blowing up the pipeline would give them a real reason to not reopen it.

I'm not saying they did it, but just wanted to counter your argument that "there was no motive for Russia to blow up the pipeline"

I think this presumes that Russia cares what people think.

They don't, they only care about what people will do.

They could keep the pipeline shut for as long as the wanted on the most ludicrous of claims.

This is wrong. Yes, they didn't install the turbine even after it was delivered, but for the most time, there was still heavily throttled throughput. Only a week or so before the explosions Putin shut the pipeline entirely.

well, not all people live in the US

(in np.sum)

> The value of the axis argument is, as a matter of fact, the number of the index in question: The first index is axis=0, the second one is axis=1, and so on

If I'm not wrong - this statement is wrong - the axis does not represent index (or otherwise it would be axis 0 = row, axis 1 = column). The actual idea behind is a little unintuitive, but explained well here: https://aerinykim.medium.com/numpy-sum-axis-intuition-6eb949...

It's explained in more detail further down in that paragraph, I think the wording is fine.

The axis argument gives the index of the axis along which your summate, and which therefore disappears after summation.

There might be a confusion about whether "axis 0" is rows or columns? Its length is the number of rows, but it "points" along columns.

I prefer just calling them axis 0, 1, 2, ... and avoid thinking about rows and columns in numpy, I've found that sometimes avoids confusion.

I could never grasp the conventions for "axis=". Everyone has some memory trick, some of them being confusing/wrong.

On the other hand einsum is Crystal clear and not prone to confusion.

> np.einsum("ij -> j", B) # sum along rows to create one column-like array

> np.einsum("ij -> i", B) # sum along columns to create one row-like array

Edit: More Einstein sum fun at https://stackoverflow.com/questions/26089893/understanding-n...

Never could I. What helps me often is to consider the C language heritage of Python. There, the beginner also has the slightly confusing some_var[y][x]=some_value, caused by the computers memory model behind. Consequently, I'm always looking for the hierarchy of fastest changing indexes. This explains/justifies a lot of the design decisions made also for numpy.

It's simple. It's the axis that will disappear (or become length 1 with keepdims) after performing the operation.

It's not simple because there are two axis of interest: the axis along you sum, and the axis that are preserved (ie, that gives the dimension of the returned array).

Both of them are of interest and after you were confused once about which one to supply to axis=..., there is no way back to clear the confusion. With einsum there is no confusion.

If you have a high-dimensional array then in your latter convention if you had to specify the “remaining” axes you’d need to provide a lengthy list. That’d be user-hostile.

The usual matrix notation is a_ij for the element in the ith row and the jth column. If you order axes in this way you get the numpy convention.

that's what I mean - in this sense, the axis 0 should be row, but instead it's column in numpy

The way I think about it is: as you change the 0th index you move up and down the column. Same with the 1st index and the row. That's how I remember it anyway!

Think about multidimensional arrays, not just matrices. How would your convention work there?

Yes. Does it mean it's bad? For people that just start to learn the library, it's sometimes useful to have a visual representation. Also, helpful to have a list of main features.

while I like the idea expressed by the quote, I don't like the overall judgemental sentiment that "if you don't mold the world around you, you live a poor version of life". It reminds me of something that could be said by a cultist person coach. Nothing wrong or worse I think with living a simple life.

It's hard not to reflect on Steve Job's quotes like that and think about how Apple manufactures it's phones. What a reality they've created for the foxcon workers.

You do know that Foxconn has over 800k employees around the world? And that they manufacture a huge amount of the electronics we all use every day.

For some reason the notion of Foxcon == Apple manufacturer has stuck in the public consciousness, mostly because it brings in the sweet sweet clicks just by having "Apple manufacturer <bad thing>" in there.

The reality that they have created for Foxconn workers is that they have a job that they would die than quit. It's that important to them.

Why do you assume that it has to be Apple's fault that China is fucked up?

> they have a job that they would die than quit. It's that important to them.

Or maybe simply quitting would be even worse than taking their own lives, somehow. And Foxconn might be part of making that situation a reality.

Replace “laws” with “customs” and the sentence works. The Chinese leadership doesn’t care about its citizenry as long as $$$ keeps flowing. They are hardly unique in that, of course, but they’re more blatant than others.

I honestly think that's a simplistic view that allows us in the West to feel better about how terribly we're taking care of our own people.

Just look at the U.S. handling of COVID and how there's still no universal healthcare. China did a much better job here even if you think their figures aren't exact, (most likely true, but so is the case in places like Florida etc.)

I don't think they're somehow uniquely more corrupt that here in the West, they're however much younger, (convenient how we disregard our meddling there for centuries), they're trying to match the West in as short timespan as possible and of course they're going to line up their pockets along the way, as almost everyone with enough power and access does when given the chance, sadly. But they've also massively expanded the middle class and lifted people from poverty.

Remember the U.S. had slavery and yes it is appropriate to compare that since the U.S. had the same government then than it does now, China didn't.

As China grows in strength and prosperity so do its laws become more worker friendly as it transitions from a factory for the world to a more knowledge based economy. In other words it follows a fairly standard development trajectory, just on a much shorter timeframe so the abuses are more visible and less spread out, unlike in the West. Plus there's more technology to document it all.

I'm not much into Steve Jobs, never been an Apple user, but I get the impression that Steve Jobs was a very judgmental person, also on behalf of others.

Having said that, I personally also think that it would better if the non-molding was a conscious choice, and not due to lack of thought. I personally often see people suffer due to lack of possible molding.

On a fundamental level, living any kind of life, “simple” or not, is a fruitless attempt to discover the ideal way a life should be spent. There is no single, truthful answer to that question. It is entirely possible to live a simple life and adhere to the standard Steve set here - perhaps the simplicity of your lifestyle is the thing that will change the world.

It is unhelpful to most people on two levels - firstly, about half of us are below median intelligence. Secondly, not everyone can change the world all at once. There are too many people and too few things to change for that to be feasible. By the numbers, most people are going to have to be satisfied with having no real impact.

I think you are severely underestimating the local effect an individual can have by influencing life, albeit on a smaller scale. Not everything has to be on a world-scale. In my case, I love watching movies and discussing them, but never applied that in any way to my environment – until I started a small, local film club, which has given me a real sense of having a bit of influence.

I also like the general idea of the quote and I'm against calling someone's way if life "less", but I think the value to be had is from the realization and everyone should have that realization.

I can confirm the 666 bus - I go to the Hel peninsula often and it always makes me laugh

I think you are overestimating the ease of people moving from one place to another. While job may be a primary reason people live in the cities, there are other important reasons like access to entertainment, shops, being close to other friends who leave nearby etc. It's not as simple as saying "oh, I could spare 500$ a month by moving in the middle of nowhere, let's do it". Not everybody wants to live in suburban/rural areas and spend most of his time at home.

> oh, I could spare 500$ a month by moving in the middle of nowhere, let's do it

For $500/mo sure. But if it's like people say and landlords try to raise rent $2k/mo like people are saying, then yes people would definitely move.

Also you could easily save $500/mo right now by moving from a big city to somewhere small. Right now, without UBI being a thing. The rent difference under a hypothetical UBI rent increase would be far more than $500/mo.

You think suburban people stay home all the time? What sort of overgeneralization is that? Suburbs = guaranteed vehicle = travel not just mandatory for commuting, but at will, as desired.

Funny enough, if you use a USA based VPN server, the option will appear on your account and you'll be able to activate it. It Will stay activr for your account even if you switch back from VPN

That's deliberate... Those kind of "annoy the customer" limitations are all for PR/legal/business reasons, and the engineers building the features want to make the restrictions as easy to get around as possible.

I have a deep respect for him overcoming what looks like unovercomable circumstances to achieve what he dreamed about.

Judging only the article however - what always lacks in my opinion in those kind of motivational articles is an approach to achieving minor, everyday goals. Not all of us have a desire to "threaten themselves with a gun" to achieve a goal - sometimes we just want to do something but nor think about it every second of our lives.

For that, I highly recommend the book “Atomic Habits”. One of the major takeaways is that every time you do something, you’re making a vote for the type of person you want to be in the future. And from that mindset, if gives a lot of advice about how to turn actions into habits.

The way I like to think about this is that every decision I make helps build the brain I'd like to have. After all, each decision stimulates a certain series of neural pathways. The more those pathways get used, the easier and more accessible they become.

I still fail, a lot, but I try to keep the phrase, "build the brain you wish you had" a lot. Which is really just synonymous with building habits, but there's something more physical about influencing your brain.

I haven't read Atomic Habits yet, but I read 'The power of habit' by Charles Duhgig. I think motivational quotes, inspirational stories are overrated and habits are underrated. Inspirational stories are great to make you realize that you too can achieve something, but they stop there, they don't take you any further.

Recently, I stumbled on a website called Focusmate and I think this is going to help me in the long run.

He did cover some of this when he discussed ideas like surrounding himself with people in places he wanted to be, to give him insight into them and inspiration. The gritty details tend to be more specific to an individual thing, but giving the sign posts and the inspiration is reasonably universal.