amalcon

35 ms·

481.
by amalcon 4y ago
For what it's worth, the "cities redesigning themselves around them" thing actually came from a news report about some guy's book about Kamen. As far as I can tell he never said that himself.
482.
by amalcon 4y ago
Wow, uh... about 37 years ago, this happened: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_Challenger_disas... . McAuliffe was to be the first teacher they sent to space, and they didn't try again until I think &#x2
483.
by amalcon 4y ago
Yeah, people will put up with a lot of "looking silly" for something that solves a real problem. Umbrellas arguably look silly, but it's well worth it to not be drenched. I used to be told I looked dorky for wearing a bic
484.
by amalcon 4y ago
There have been at least a few games whose PR mentioned Warren Spector's involvement.
485.
by amalcon 4y ago
Many societies over the course of history have decided that slavery should be legal. Some still do today. I absolutely deny those communities' moral right to this decision (though I can't do much about the practical right).
486.
by amalcon 4y ago
Asking people addicted to sugary drinks to forego straws entirely would result in serious dental issues.
487.
by amalcon 4y ago
I mean, it's what the largest cable news network in the U.S. would have said.
488.
by amalcon 4y ago
A quick search indicates that there are a bunch of companies named "Dilithium". There are also several chemical compounds with "Dilithium" in their names.
489.
by amalcon 4y ago
The problem is that the strength or weakness of an argument is not objective. Usually steelmanning is fallacious when you don't first seek agreement with the counterparty that the new version of the argument is stronger. This comes u
490.
by amalcon 4y ago
This seems like it would be pretty testable. We still take a lot of photos under sunlight. If light sources are the cause, then the effect should disappear if we look only at such photos.
491.
by amalcon 4y ago
That sounds pretty good until you've had the same discussion 37 times. Having the same discussion for the 38th time does not feel like a conversation; it feels a denial of service attack. "We don't do that here" actuall
492.
by amalcon 4y ago
Obligatory reference to http://thistothat.com/ . It doesn't cover every factor, but if you just want to quickly find an adhesive that will do a good job holding one thing to another, it's great. It also gives dec
493.
by amalcon 4y ago
I see a few folks in these comments essentially saying "If only everyone else would do this!" This rather misses the point. You don't empathize with your opposition for their sake; you do it for your own sake. You do it be
494.
by amalcon 4y ago
Pumped hydro is usually considered the best way to do this. Basically, you pump water from the bottom of the dam back up to the top. This is great because you probably already wanted most of the infrastructure for hydroelectric power; the
495.
by amalcon 4y ago
Well, there's a lot more money in poker.
496.
by amalcon 4y ago
It would be tricky in more densely populated areas, thanks to the ruling in Kelo vs. City of New London . "The local government thinks they'll get more economic activity from someone else" is a valid reason to exercise emin
497.
by amalcon 4y ago
A few versions of that exist; Nebula is probably the biggest. There's a reason you may not have heard of it, though.
498.
by amalcon 4y ago
It's unlikely that the FCC has the power to do either 1 or 2.
499.
by amalcon 4y ago
That's correct, in deontological or virtue-based systems it varies a lot from system to system.
500.
by amalcon 4y ago
You probably use a consequentialist meta-ethical framework. This is great -- I do too -- but in a deontological or virtue-based system it may or may not work out this way. We've already got an example of such a deontological system h
501.
by amalcon 4y ago
I think you're underestimating the pain relief thing. I know multiple people who never touched the stuff recreationally, developed a chronic pain condition (arthritis, in one example), and now swear by it. The only alternatives with
502.
by amalcon 4y ago
It's also probably why that incorrect image exists: projecting such an image would have been absolutely vital for morale, and those stories influence the stories we tell today. In many ways, it's still vital for morale today, bu
503.
by amalcon 4y ago
My usual approach is to point out the problem I'm trying to solve rather than suggest a specific solution. I also like to phrase as a question about practicality. Sometimes the answer to that question is "No", and I want to
504.
by amalcon 4y ago
To play devil's advocate here, there are several things that have or had been "known forever in the fitness industry / community", which are just plain false. "No pain, no gain" is probably the most famous.
505.
by amalcon 4y ago
I think basically the whole space is a fad, but fads don't usually disappear entirely. Beanie babies were a fad; they are no longer a fad; this doesn't seem to affect my niece's enjoyment of the beanie baby we bought for her
506.
by amalcon 4y ago
They wouldn't necessarily need to parse the source code. E.g. initially training a neural network on replays of human runs (AlphaGo style, as opposed to AlphaZero) would probably be considered "spoiling" in the Nethack commu
507.
by amalcon 4y ago
Also because rule-based AI is typically much less computationally expensive to execute than ML-based AI. This matters in games because they often have other things to do with the available computational resources on the target hardware.
508.
by amalcon 4y ago
What really "killed"[0] Perl were two main things: 1) PHP: Perl is great for general text processing, but it has warts that really bother people who aren't used to the language. PHP is slightly better for working with HTML
509.
by amalcon 4y ago
This is similar to the St. Petersburg problem. The way I satisfy myself with that answer is to note that it's kind of a spherical cow problem. Nobody in the real world can afford to run this game, since it requires an infinite amount
510.
by amalcon 4y ago
The paradox is supposed to be in the contradiction between this (incorrect) reasoning and the correct reasoning, not in the counterintuitive conclusion of the incorrect reasoning.

More ›