asgard1024

17 ms·

91.
by asgard1024 11y ago
What about functional reactive programming? And what about flux pattern? Didn't these resolve this "failed dream" of multi-threaded GUI update? (I am asking real, not rhetorical, questions.)
92.
by asgard1024 11y ago
This is so true and I wish economists and other social scientists would research that more. In general, we know many factors that decrease general level of trust (sometimes called "social capital") in the society. This is sometime
93.
by asgard1024 11y ago
In Czech Republic, we have many puzzle hunts per year. The "escape room" fad also came here, it seems similar; I haven't tried it, but it seems really overpriced. Typical price for 20-hour puzzle hunt is about $3-5 per person
94.
by asgard1024 11y ago
I know everything is in the Bible, but I am interested in your beliefs! This is why I find libertarianism to be close to theology; when I start asking really difficult questions, you will refer me to some book, which turns out to be hopeles
95.
by asgard1024 11y ago
OK, sounds reasonable. So, if you don't mind - what about lying? What if somebody borrows something from you and they refuse to return it? How is initiating coercion against them bad? What if someone falsely claims they own the piece o
96.
by asgard1024 11y ago
I am not sure I follow - this is what AGW theory is saying, that humans cause global warming by running civilization on carbon fuels. I just wanted to address possibly wrong belief of GP that waste heat can be the primary cause of GW.
97.
by asgard1024 11y ago
> I'm not sure you're actually asking me a question. You seem to already know my answer, and indeed, you know precisely the rebuttal you'd like to say to my answer. > The only thing I know for sure is that my ethical se
98.
by asgard1024 11y ago
It seems to me, since basic income didn't appear spontaneously so far, it probably requires coercive force to appear, so you're against it. Anyway, thanks for the reply to my original comment. Like user "solipsism" thoug
99.
by asgard1024 11y ago
> But did that persist, or was it just "switching cost"? Opinion differs, but I think thanks to EU we were forced to accept a reasonable legal prevention to most egregious acts of economic crime. If that didn't happen, we
100.
by asgard1024 11y ago
> considering the economics literature says that the strength and consistency of the law is a crucial component of making a market economy successful Unfortunately, in large parts of Eastern Europe, this advice was ignored. In reality, t
101.
by asgard1024 11y ago
> we probably are warming the world with all of our machines Probably very little compared to GH gases contribution, see here: http://skepticalscience.com/waste-heat-global-warming.htm There is a lot of energy coming to
102.
by asgard1024 11y ago
I kinda agree with you, and I think it's unfair you're getting downvoted by fundamentalists. I don't understand the libertarian stance either. They are against concentration and misuse of power (big business and government),
103.
by asgard1024 11y ago
I disagree. I think the monopolist (or bigger company in general) has more options, regardless whether or not it's government backed. At the very least, bigger companies can afford to play chicken game with safer margin of error. Havin
104.
by asgard1024 11y ago
> The economic answer would be that the possible costs it could impose on you can be expressed as violations of your property rights Let me explain a specific example: If a person A cheats person B out of his money, it affects me negativ
105.
by asgard1024 11y ago
> Beating people up isn't market activity - it's at least borderline criminal. The beauty of the example is that you don't have to beat people up. What is only needed is A to risk more than B and C. The point was though yo
106.
by asgard1024 11y ago
> I think that the information derived from what people say with money is more accurate than what they say verbally. OK. But I still don't understand the point you're trying to make. But even if markets were more honest, it is
107.
by asgard1024 11y ago
Well, if you only consider interactions of two people, you have already decided to ignore power dynamic in your model. Just consider the simplest case of how it can happen that someone has power over someone else despite having same real st
108.
by asgard1024 11y ago
> But there is a difference between what people say and what they do. I am not sure what is your argument. Voting (if that's what you're alluding to) can have the same real consequences as spending money. Both are a limited res
109.
by asgard1024 11y ago
> A key notion of economics is that if two people voluntarily agree to something, it must be of some benefit of them at that moment compared to alternatives else they wouldn't have agreed. A market can consist solely of such interac
110.
by asgard1024 11y ago
> Democracy has a similar basis to capitalism actually. I absolutely disagree with this statement. In democracy, you cannot trade or accumulate votes, and it is one of its tenets. In capitalism, you can trade and accumulate "votes&q
111.
by asgard1024 11y ago
> Price signals work better as the rationality and level of informedness of participants goes up, this should be obvious. It actually isn't obvious. Optimal strategy is not a continuous function of game parameters (ultimatum game is
112.
by asgard1024 11y ago
Who then defines what is fraud? If I can't stop transaction of two other people based on what I think is fraud, who can ever? And if you are telling me that I can't ever stop any transaction of two people, that actually poses extr
113.
by asgard1024 11y ago
I wouldn't have big problem with the free market (as you describe), if the following big feedback loop of investing would be limited: People can "cheat" (for example give incomplete information, or mislead about how much stuf
114.
by asgard1024 11y ago
This article reminds me of theologians who use argument from ignorance to justify their own beliefs in one true god (basically an attempt to impose some absolute moral framework on society). OK, there is always competition, no problem here.
115.
by asgard1024 11y ago
Not quite, I think even most cognitive biases can be corrected at higher level of thought. It's more like cognitive dissonances and the strategies you use to cope with them, but it's hard to tell without knowing the architecture o
116.
by asgard1024 11y ago
I think you can generalize it like that, although maybe it more depends on type of relationship you want to have; physical proximity is only a proxy for that. Perhaps building a more robust reputation systems is a true way to get a more eff
117.
by asgard1024 11y ago
Eh, where to start.. Probably with the Peter Thiel's famous line "competition is for losers". Then you have things like industry associations or unions the sole purpose of which is to advocate non-free market for a certain gr
118.
by asgard1024 11y ago
If that's the reason why outsourcing doesn't work, why employment does work? I think this is the flaw in the article. Perhaps outsourcing and employment do work, but it's always better to hand the job to somebody from local c
119.
by asgard1024 11y ago
I think he is quite right, but the real blind spots are way higher in the human thought than object representation. Perhaps that's how it has to be, at the very top level of cognition, there is no other mechanism for correcting errors,
120.
by asgard1024 11y ago
I am thinking someone should do a similar list for technology news. For instance: - A renowned researcher gives hope to solve a long-standing problem. - A famous hacker releases some cool software (or hardware blueprints) as an open source

More ›