bumby

7 ms·

61.
by bumby 4mo ago
If they don’t want to use it for the agreed upon purpose, they could either offer to pay the true value so they can use it for something else or give it back to the farmer/heirs. The real problem seems to be one city gave the land to a
62.
by bumby 4mo ago
I’m pretty patriotic but even I can recognize some parallels. There are examples of targeting civilians (tarring and feathering loyalists, or destroying their property). If you consider the attacks against Tesla to be terrorism [1] then the
63.
by bumby 4mo ago
Well gee, to start France has higher healthcare quality/access, higher life expectancy, much lower treatable mortality, better work-life balance (less hours worked, more guaranteed leave), lower wealth inequality, higher voter turnout
64.
by bumby 4mo ago
I would argue this take conflates attention with cognitive overhead required because of a lack of training. Navigating with our closed feels like it takes more attention because we’ve practiced so many hours navigating by sight that it no
65.
by bumby 4mo ago
Fair enough. The “hidden” aspect is what I was alluding to…ie, control that exists but isn’t apparent to the pilots (and worse, intermittent). In the human factors world, it was more complex than the pilots assumed, but you’re right that it
66.
by bumby 4mo ago
First, snark goes against HN guidelines so you might want familiarize yourself with them. Secondly, MCAS autonomously adjusts trim based on sensor inputs to avoid a hazard. It is not advisory and directly controls flight surfaces. This woul
67.
by bumby 4mo ago
You seem to confuse "high consequence" with "abnormal".
68.
by bumby 4mo ago
As the article already states, there is a well known phenomenon in aviation called automation-induced complacency. So, yes, if you automate landing to the extent that human pilots no longer pay attention to abnormal signals that indicate so
69.
by bumby 4mo ago
> The entire premise of a system is that it removes the need for careful attention. I think this premise is flawed or, at best, too narrow. A system is just a logical grouping of items that perform a function. Sometimes that function
70.
by bumby 4mo ago
If you expect every aircraft to land, it seems to meet the very definition of "normal" operation. An abnormal landing would be something like trying to land with a broken elevator surface.
71.
by bumby 4mo ago
I think part of the point of the article is that it also makes edge-cases more dangerous and catastrophic than if there was no autopilot at all. From the article: > The argument for automation is that it frees up cognitive bandwidth. Few
72.
by bumby 4mo ago
That’s a real aspect, but only one dimension. Nonetheless, it’s telling that it’s what you distill the entire problem down to. There are many other problems that make the problem hard: a) these communities often depend on consensus decision
73.
by bumby 4mo ago
Right, that’s the yeoman farmer ideal I brought up. I just don’t think that works with anything remotely like modern society so it’s a romantic but impractical idea. IMO it can only work in relatively small groups, just like the commune. On
74.
by bumby 4mo ago
I think the argument that minarchists take is that federal law should be modified to only cover military, courts, and police. A coherent libertarian could only interface with those, although it would be difficult and probably start to look
75.
by bumby 4mo ago
“beyond and to include minarchism” is pretty specific. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night-watchman_state
76.
by bumby 4mo ago
I can go into detail, but for the sake of the argument let’s define it in the Norquist fashion: a government small enough that it can be drowned in the bathtub. A stricter definition might be anything beyond and to include minarchism.
77.
by bumby 4mo ago
I think a lot of these statements are, at best, incomplete. For example, healthcare quality can get better while access gets lower, still resulting in worse outcomes for patients. Or, housing cost should be normalized based on size since un
78.
by bumby 4mo ago
Would you extend that same sentiment to the extremes of the libertarian crowd too?
79.
by bumby 4mo ago
I don't think that idea necessarily holds for the Army Corps of Engineers. They technically work under a military command, but the vast bulk of the engineers are civilians. The military officers tend to rotate in and out of positions r
80.
by bumby 4mo ago
Have you ever watched a movie with a fire or explosion just didn't look right because it was a scale replica? At a subconscious level, you may have picked up on how the dynamics of the smoke or debris didn't fit right with the sca
81.
by bumby 4mo ago
Not sure about the exact thrust of your question but a few points: - flood management is not easy to monetize so there is not much incentive for private industry. The timelines for design decisions (100 year, 500 year) often don’t mate well
82.
by bumby 4mo ago
> It’s neat to see something competent! The existence of negative externalities or tradeoffs does not inherently imply incompetence. I remember reading that the USACE said the NOLA levees would not adequately protect against a category
83.
by bumby 4mo ago
Also, Armstrong gave up his military commission before he was an astronaut. NASA wanted to make it clear the moon landing was not a military operation by having a civilian commander of Apollo 11.
84.
by bumby 4mo ago
I think you’re making a logical leap. Geopolitics!= military. The Apollo program (even according to NDT) was geopolitically motivated which isn’t necessarily the same thing as being militarily motivated.
85.
by bumby 4mo ago
Money and economics are not “physics”. They are social constructs and not immutable natural laws. Prices can go up as long as people are willing to inflate PE ratios; this isn’t the same as saying my weight will increase indefinitely becaus
86.
by bumby 4mo ago
Given the current sentiment as well as the past response for "too big to fail", I can definitely see why one might think this time is different.
87.
by bumby 4mo ago
Isn't a counter argument that there are index funds for just about everything? Ie, I'm sure there will be an index for "Everything in S&P Except SpaceX" for those who think SpaceX doesn't belong there. There are
88.
by bumby 4mo ago
> People have seen others make insane, life changing money at this slot machine and are wanting to take their chances. Isn’t this the exact same sentiment from the late 1920s when people were making “insane, life changing” money by buyi
89.
by bumby 4mo ago
Can you elaborate on how passive investing contributes to this?
90.
by bumby 4mo ago
NASA is a prestige organization. If there isn’t a peer rival there is little to gain from funding that prestige. Whether that is for the betterment of society is up for debate.

More ›