arthur_pryor

12 ms·

61.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
oh interesting, esp in light of your other comment's statement that regulated legalization hasn't made things better for sex workers in vegas. i think i need to run some errands and do some work instead of scouting bandcamp and re
62.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
I have nothing of substance to add to this comment, but I agree with absolutely everything you've said, and I hope you don't get downvoted. I can't really add any nuance, because I don't know where in the weeds we might
63.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> Blockchains have the potential to remove all doubt. given a very specific and likely untenable list of assumptions about the way the entire human system works, yes, i'd agree that they might remove all doubt. outside of textbooks,
64.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> Blockchains provide a verifiably immutable log. This is the exact primitive you want for elections - tamper-proof logging. i disagree. the exact primitive you want is a verifiable counter, where people can be verified as being allowed
65.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
i regret that i have but one upvote to give
66.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> I fully admit to not being an expert on voting and don't know about any reforms taking place. I was simply stating that a blockchain solution might be better than just casting a plain paper ballot. I am being dead serious and I&#x
67.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
zero knowledge proofs fail to address this concern: > all you have to do is to set up a fake website advertising "Look up if your vote is counted as it should be", let people type in their credentials, and you now know exactly
68.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> But using more data you can filter out the actual druggies with high confidence. i'm not comfortable with our justice system acting on the "high confidence" of some proprietary heuristic with a closed source implementati
69.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
a palantir employee does a great job of explaining why their technology is frightening, as part of pushing back on someone from NO who wanted predictions with numerical rankings for potential offenders/victims: > “The looming concer
70.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> And quite possibly more valid. can you explain why doing it with a computer might make it more valid? are you already highly confident that you have good heuristics to automate and scale? if so, what's your evidence? if the heu
71.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> You're saying that if Amazon is asking that, they are responsible for the life of the person delivering it. > If I am asking Amazon that, therefore, does that make me responsible? yes. definitely. not entirely, but for sure t
72.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
fwiw, i think there are many ethnic minority private school girls who have just about as much working against them in total as a working class white guy. parental income is definitely a huge factor, maybe bigger than any other. but i woul
73.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> "Robots are racist and sexist, just like the people who created them" to quote the simpsons, "it's funny because it's true." (still, funny comment, i upvoted, fwiw)
74.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> But you say "going with what's in the pipeline", that basically means "hiring on average the best/mean candidates according to their metrics that apply". > To say that they shouldn't do that you ba
75.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> > Maybe it is wrong that SV companies have proportionally more Asians than whites. Not "morally wrong", but wrong in the sense that Asian communities have optimized for certain metrics (tests, school performances, college
76.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> Usually these small functions are also only called once. In that case especially it leads to messy, bloated code that is in fact harder to reason about, harder to maintain and less efficient besides. the flipside is that if this approa
77.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
i assume the LEDs suggested by the parent are for the protection of the device's owner. for your use case, you might consider tape that's the same color as the material surrounding the light. though, that'd be a huge inconve
78.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
could've still been helpful training, even if they didn't want to be doing it.
79.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
cool! good to know.
80.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
>> I don't get what's so great about the area, anyways. Every time I've been it's just seemed like an insanely expensive shithole...but I guess I'm not the one splashing billions of dollars around. > If you
81.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> My argument is that having getters and setters exposes your implementation. If you have "getFoo" and "setFoo" it exposes that your class contains a value called Foo. My argument is that you should either give your m
82.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> If you have a mutable class, and you're modifying its fields, you're doing it for a reason, right? Often it's part of a larger operation. So why not name the method that mutates the field after that reason. I got away fr
83.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
sure, ok, if you only write immutable classes, by definition you never need setters, right? i won't defend mutable classes (i won't decry them either), because i haven't personally thought tons about the benefits of immutabil
84.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
that's definitely the sort of thing i like about this place. i'd imagine programmers are very very heavily represented here, but it's nice that it's not to the exclusion of everyone else.
85.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
i'm a little rusty on my java, but i don't think this will work for non-constants (i.e. it won't work for things you don't set at compile time). to my knowledge, there's no "make this a constant after the first
86.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
what if the constructor's not the only place you can set the value?
87.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> Manipulating social cost is what you do with social engineering. definitely one of the more significant parts of the social engineering toolkit.
88.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
i think maybe we should keep "genocide" reserved for people, or at least wait on applying it to software till we think that software might be sentient. linguistic inflation sort of sucks [0]. [0] http://www.macmillandi
89.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> people who just do their thing ignoring others in a professional context requiring collaboration, that's an asshole move, and people who do that sort of thing on a regular basis should be reprimanded.
90.
by arthur_pryor 9y ago
> If everybody has autonomy in a shared codebase, you end up with a heterogeneous spaghetti of unrelated design decisions and styles overlapping everywhere. "everyone writes it" in the long term can still allow specific people

More ›