No, it is not "Hacker News" to paint a large swath of people as "ignorant". The proper way would have been to publish a detailed, technical analysis and present your ideas along with your proof to the greater community and facilitate a discussion.
I want to live in this world, where we're all part of a larger collective endeavor to discover the truth, to be more informed, learn continuously, and evolve together. That's the old-school philosophy and mission of science for the betterment of humanity.
My guy, there are government officials that are sharing photos of the Orion constellation stating that it's a drone swarm just standing there over their property...
I am one of those weirdos that like to work on "un-sexy" things behind the scenes which hopefully makes the life of my colleagues a bit better with every attempt. I don't think it is necessary for small teams, and may even be considered a waste of time, but once a team is sufficiently big and spread out, I think a few people working in the background, keeping watch of things, cleaning up after people, proactively improving stuff, creating and enforcing rules and standards is very beneficial and necessary for a team's next growth spurt.
Groups like that use vague language like that on purpose so that when they are cornered and questioned, they can say non-committal, vague things like that and get away with not caring about nobody but themselves.
So yes, if they really mean protecting the community along with young artists, they have to explicitly and clearly state it to be believable.
I second that they should be proud of this, it is the way it should be done. However in my experience it is not that rare. If you work around capable engineers such process always happens by itself, IME, because they all want ideas and suggestions as early as possible. It results in a better product and more maintainable system if peers share their experience, and 1-2 hour initial meetings are great for this. As are brainstorming sessions for overcoming challenges along the way.
For the last few months, we have done our best to reduce both our electric and gas usages. Unfortunately, regardless of however much we reduce, each bill came higher than the one before.
This has roughly been my experience in San Diego with SDG&E as well. We are renting with mostly older appliances, including an electric water heater that with an energy rating sticker suggesting a cost of nearly $100 month - the numbers look much better on it because they use 12c kWh lol.
We do nearly all vacuuming, washer, dryer and dishwasher on the weekends when it's cheapest. We don't use an AC or heater. But, we do cook nearly every night on an ancient electric stove and I do work from home with 1 or 2 32" monitors. It seems impossible to pay much less than $150 month.
There are plenty of monopolies, duopolies, etc in the "free" market that have nothing to do with governments. Example: How broadband companies share the map and don't intrude into each other's "territories".
Largely in part due to regulatory capture; it is not necessarily innate of a government to cause this. Maybe restrictions on how corporations are able to influence governments to act against their constituency might solve this problem, rather than giving corporations carte blanche to do anything...
When the capital investment to compete with large players in the ISP/electricity market is enormous you will, eventually, end up with a monopoly either way.
Laying cables for internet/electricity is expensive, I cannot comprehend why the USA hasn't understood this particularity and hasn't attempted to create a publicly-owned national grid and fibre infrastructure where providers can plug into and offer internet connectivity and electricity production over it.
You do not want multiple competing companies laying down their own electricity cables, nor internet cables, it's wasteful and just creates a huge barrier for any competition to appear...
Other countries have tackled this issue by regulating that the company that owns the cable and the company that provides the service over the cables are separate entities, frequently with the cable owner being the state.
