"Our most likely estimate is that replacement costs are approximately $91 billion. Military and strategic assets — nuclear facilities, missile and drone production infrastructure, air bases, naval vessels, and air defense systems — make up roughly half that total, at approximately $46 billion, which is equivalent to 4-6 years of Iran’s pre-war defense budget"
How exactly did they arrive at this estimate? I would like to see a building-by-building breakdown, or at least a methodology. Feels very vibe-researched tbh.
> 8 queries implies 8 tables, which is well under the limit for both Postgres and MySQL where the planner may give up and choose a suboptimal plan.
I'm not sure thats true for Postgres. optimal join ordering is np-hard, and finding an optimal join requires exhaustive search through n! combinations (n=number of joins) - thats why postgres generally uses heuristics to figure out join order. 8 is also the default value of "join_collapse_limit" setting in postgres, so it can't ever reliably optimize over 8 joins at a time. Additionally, postgres starts using "genetic algorithms" aka testing random combinations of joins with 12 joins by default (geqo_threshold setting).
I generally agree its better to use database to its fullest, but I would say 8 joins is probably the "limit". Internally at work I've advised teams to try to avoid anything more than 6 joins for "hot-path" queries.
Can anyone explain why I would want to use this over an orchestration tool that lives outside the DB? Read through the Readme and some of the examples, I still don't get it.
> Those numbers also show why the “wealth transfer from India” is mostly fake. India and China were both at a subsistence level. There was no meaningful wealth to transfer.
Not an Elon fan, but markets dictate the value, not analyst reports or "fundamentals". The stock is simply worth whatever people will pay for it. The fact that people are paying an implied valuation of 2T for it currently is a strong signal IMO.
> The key correctness insight is this: any two majorities of nodes must overlap in at least one node. So between any two consecutive global state changes — whether two commits, two leader elections, or one of each — at least one node participated in both.
intuitively makes sense, but would be nice to see this result explicitly derived or illustrated the same way the fano planes were.
yes, there is counterparty risk with both etfs and mutual funds. in general, stick to the well regarded issuers or fund managers. vanguard is the best imo, they do a lot to protect their shareholders.
Could you expand on this?