darawk

14 ms·

61.
by darawk 4y ago
The effect size was about a third of a standard deviation, which isn't huge, but isn't trivial either. Assuming it's true and genetically determined, that could have significant effects at the aggregate level. However, a ray
62.
by darawk 4y ago
> That's why. Racism is something that we made up, and then tried to massage circumstances and data to "prove" it. This I listed reasons to doubt the conclusions of the study. The study is generally well done and accounts
63.
by darawk 4y ago
That is true, and an important criticism of IQ as a measure in general. However, it's not clear that the Flynn effect is relevant to the conclusions of this study. Why do you think it is?
64.
by darawk 4y ago
Why are you so confident that it's not true? The best study I'm aware of on the topic is this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption... This concludes that there is 3-5 point geneti
65.
by darawk 4y ago
This is a fun read and nice taxonomy that I largely agree with...right up until the end when he seemed to want to make a separate category for online warriors that say things he agrees with more frequently. It's amazing how blinding in
66.
by darawk 4y ago
Are you saying the demonstrated results are all in sample? Because this is definitely not true for out of sample data. And the GP comment implies that there is in fact a validation/holdout set.
67.
by darawk 4y ago
Who is holding loan officers accountable?
68.
by darawk 4y ago
You want to make loans without predictive optimization? Good luck with that. This is truly one of the most childish criticisms I've ever seen published. Anyone who works on forecasting or "predictive optimization" understands
69.
by darawk 4y ago
It's worth reading the response to Haidt and his coauthors re-analysis: https://sci-hub.se/https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-02... I haven't read all of Haidt's position yet, or the o
70.
by darawk 4y ago
Most children didn't eat nearly as well as they do today before capitalism.
71.
by darawk 4y ago
There is nothing illegal about looking like a scam. It is only illegal to be a scam. I think the market making profits from Tether have been pretty substantial over the years. They charge very high redemption fees, which means that eith
72.
by darawk 4y ago
> I don't think they're playing with the trust of their own stablecoin to get cheap USDT, it'd be better for them to be more trustworthy and have more USD to invest in safe investments with low interests, but they're
73.
by darawk 4y ago
Even in the event that Coinbase became insolvent, theoretically that shouldn't impact USDC. USDC has entirely separate reserves that are in short term debt instruments (i.e. T-bills) and cash equivalents, uncorrelated to the crypto eco
74.
by darawk 4y ago
> This doesn't seem like a particularly great strategy, compared with the alternative of running a stablecoin and exchange that doesn't look dodgy (or indeed an actual fraud which is at least insanely lucrative). It is very muc
75.
by darawk 4y ago
All the people mindlessly saying "counterparty risk" clearly didn't read the article. He has thought about this carefully. His counterparty in this case is Aave, a DeFi smart contract. Smart contracts famously get hacked freq
76.
by darawk 4y ago
> Why would I ever let bing crawl my site if they aren't going to send any visitors to me? I don't think it's up to you, legally speaking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HiQ_Labs_v._LinkedIn I mean, th
77.
by darawk 4y ago
Tensors. Years ago, I would read the Wikipedia page about them every so often, and completely fail to understand what they were. Then one day I was modeling something in a spreadsheet, and I thought to myself "you know, what I really n
78.
by darawk 4y ago
But not in effort to benefit ratio, excluding the downsides of nicotine. Chewing nicotine is cheap and easy, cognitive behavioral therapy, exercise, and meditation, all take significant amounts of time at the very least. Not arguing for the
79.
by darawk 4y ago
Where was the original thread on this? I'm not sure how I missed it. Would have been (and still am) happy to contribute.
80.
by darawk 4y ago
That's exactly my point though. Figuring out the truth is very hard, and often our best experts are wrong about extremely important things. If our best experts can't get such critical things right, who can we possibly put in charg
81.
by darawk 4y ago
Semmelweis's lies demonstrably (according to contemporary experts) hurt the reputation of the entire medical establishment of his day. Fortunately, back then, they had the recourse to put him in an insane asylum.
82.
by darawk 4y ago
Scientists and doctors regularly disagree with each other about which treatments are best for patient, how much heavily to regulate pharmaceuticals, etc. And who is right in those debates have far reaching consequences for human life. Thous
83.
by darawk 4y ago
1. You sort of joined two separate things here, so i'll split them: > Repercussions for harmful or bigoted speech, as well as escalation of responses. For example what if a person or group is being bullied but it’s claimed under
84.
by darawk 4y ago
20% is not for possession. 20% is all drug-related charges. Many if not most of those are going to be intent to sell.
85.
by darawk 4y ago
> I guess it's a question of personal interpretation - but to me those two numbers aren't different enough to quibble over. Which two numbers? The only number I quoted is 20%, and that's for all drug inmates, not just po
86.
by darawk 4y ago
I guess my prior based on the way this guy was talking was that he probably had at least 6-7 figures in crypto stolen, which is worth it for a mid tier 0day. Especially if you think it's unlikely to actually get burnt.
87.
by darawk 4y ago
Why not? I have a security background. I see nothing wrong with that statement. Although what he actually said was: "Initially I imagined I was targeted by a 0day or rootkit" which actually does not make sense, because it implies
88.
by darawk 4y ago
This is a common myth. The percentage of people locked up in the US for drug offenses in general is only 20%. The share of those there specifically for possession is much lower still: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports&#x2
89.
by darawk 4y ago
It seems like a reasonably well written anecdote by someone who has some idea what they're talking about. It could obviously be false, but the consequences if he's right are potentially serious for a lot of HN users who might use
90.
by darawk 4y ago
This is an excellent article. Something bugged me about the "adult content spam" explanation for the Twitter issue when it circulated, but I couldn't put my figure on what it was. It just didn't feel like that story real

More ›