acover

47 ms·

511.
by acover 9y ago
I'm not being precise. I do not have the expertise to debate this. When I talk about the minimum wage, what really matters is what that income can buy you. Rather than discussing nominal wage and associated costs let's just combi
512.
by acover 9y ago
The minimum wage is an effort to increase the welfare of those whose skills are in excess supply. Economics is complicated and far from reliable. The idea that removing the minimum wage would result in full employment is ridiculous. It woul
513.
by acover 9y ago
One reason: excluding all paid journalism seems dumb.
514.
by acover 9y ago
Energy cost.
515.
by acover 9y ago
I meant to insult his definition. Clearly most doctors are sensible. Humans just aren't the rational logicians his standards require.
516.
by acover 9y ago
By that definition, most doctors aren't sensible.
517.
by acover 9y ago
Could a union be run as a direct democracy? Instead of a strike fund just verified segregated savings? There are much better tools for group discussion and voting. I feel like most employees would benefit from some form of collective bargai
518.
by acover 9y ago
Isn't it the zoning rules that limit building densely? The incentives of existing owners are against development.
519.
by acover 9y ago
He was explaining his relevant perspective on the issue.
520.
by acover 9y ago
A really tall fence. Making suicide difficult drastically lowers how often it happens. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_barrier
521.
by acover 9y ago
I never said they were the same. Further there is consumer debt.
522.
by acover 9y ago
The quote is about what financial planners should recommend to their clients (the retiree). I don't think the article is suggesting that financial planners recommend their clients take one for the team and spend more money.
523.
by acover 9y ago
Most money isn't just sitting around. It's in a bank or an investment. Other people are using this money.
524.
by acover 9y ago
It's not a strawman. Most of the article is written with the assumption that not spending all your money is sub-optimal. From the article: > After a lifetime of saving, it requires some psychological gymnastics to start spending you
525.
by acover 9y ago
> The logical conclusion to that would be that everyone wants to be an employee and nobody wants to be an employer. Is that true? If I have capital wouldn't I want to allocate it for the best risk/return/effort. That my pe
526.
by acover 9y ago
He got about a quarter of a billion. He almost went bankrupt in ~2008. Edit: my correction of a correction needs to be corrected > In October 2002, PayPal was acquired by eBay for US$1.5 billion in stock, of which Musk received US$165 mi
527.
by acover 9y ago
Price drop. Supply glut. Demand shortage. Investor flight. Fire sale.
528.
by acover 10y ago
I agree. However that is not a price issue. Further the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality site specific review said it was okay. I am genuinely confused why people think this is an issue.
529.
by acover 10y ago
The total ground water withdrawal in Michigan [mainly for agricultural use] is 98,000 Million gallons [1]. Why is Nestle extracting 100 Million a problem? [1] - http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdard/2015_MAEAP_Wat
530.
by acover 10y ago
This is the blind leading the blind. Fundamental truth: bayes theorem. P(evidence | null hypothesis) = P(null hypothesis | evidence) * P (evidence) / P (null hypothesis) The P-value test determines: P(evidence | null hypothesis) = 0.5%
531.
by acover 10y ago
Nope. I'm totally wrong.
532.
by acover 10y ago
Yes. Ugh. You are right. I treat P(evidence | null hypothesis) equivalent to P(null hypothesis | data). When it should be P(evidence | null hypothesis) = P(null hypothesis | evidence) * P (evidence) / P (null hypothesis) As we don&#x27
533.
by acover 10y ago
From the paper: "shows our estimate that there is only a 0.5% chance that the observed retreat of Kaskawulsh Glacier happened in the absence of a climate trend" The 0.5% has nothing to do with the river. It is their confidence tha
534.
by acover 10y ago
I am out of my depths but I do not think you are correct. The paper appears to create a model for a single glacier's retreat. Selects the parameters of this model by analyzing all glaciers. Then determines the retreat of this glacier i
535.
by acover 10y ago
Do you agree to the statement "so it's 99.5% that we correctly reject the hypothesis it occurred without warming over the industrial era"?
536.
by acover 10y ago
Yes, I agree that p-value tests have flaws. If you look at the data to determine your hypothesis it's easy to overfit. Bayes factor appear to solve this issue. I disagree that this is a basic education issue. It is a lack of agreement
537.
by acover 10y ago
The statement should be there is a 99.5% chance that we correctly rejected the null hypothesis. I agree it isn't careful wording. Thanks.
538.
by acover 10y ago
Here is the statistical analysis from the paper: The method of Roe et al. is summarized as follows. Let 1L be the change in glacier length over the past 130 years (∼1.9 km), and let σL be the standard deviation of glacier length due to stoc
539.
by acover 10y ago
You could be right that we are only looking at variations that are rare. I'm not an expert so I would give the scientists the benefit of the doubt. The possible error you identified is with the original paper and not due to a lack of b
540.
by acover 10y ago
That is possible. However in the abstract the author states "Based on satellite image analysis and a signal-to-noise ratio as a metric of glacier retreat, we conclude that this instance of river piracy was due to post-industrial climat

More ›