murbard2

19 ms·

151.
by murbard2 10y ago
New Bitcoin users also need to rely on trust to find out Bitcoin's genesis block. Yes it's trivially solved, but the same is true for PoS as long as the epochs are long enough.
152.
by murbard2 10y ago
Yes, getting accountability needs to be addressed, we're looking at several ways. Makes no sense to build on TMSP, governance that introspects over the consensus mechanism is a key feature. We aspire to be a utility, not a vassal.
153.
by murbard2 10y ago
My thinking for v2 is to use Honey Badger BFT, with multi party computation for bonding / unbonding Overall I agree with Tendermint (and contra Casper or DFinity) that it's better to just drop availability and to have a less subje
154.
by murbard2 10y ago
If you want a deterministic smart contract language, you're better off avoiding the EVM, or worse, Solidity. Tezos (plug, plug, I'm the lead on the project) has a VM with a full formal specification, and even a rudimentary embeddi
155.
by murbard2 10y ago
How do you know the solution is any good? I'm not going to go all Socrates on you so I'll jump to my point: when discussing bayesian statistics, we're touching something very profound about epistemology that can't be swe
156.
by murbard2 10y ago
How do you decide which tool is the best for the job?
157.
by murbard2 10y ago
I didn't suggest any of this was racist. I despise the hysterical, wolf-crying, race-baiting PC police, but that doesn't mean that we can't try to make the word a better place by avoiding to pile on the black=evil association
158.
by murbard2 10y ago
I don't think any harm is intended in this choice of words, but that doesn't mean one shouldn't try to be cognizant of the subtle cumulative effect they might have.
159.
by murbard2 10y ago
> If random really means random, then that's presumably true by definition. No it's not. Randomness is always with respect to a given distribution. There is nothing special about the uniform distribution over a threshold. The s
160.
by murbard2 10y ago
Do you think it's equally likely that a random opponent will redraw below 0.01 as it is that they will redraw below 0.5 or below phi? Most people do not give the right answer not because of philosophical issues around the Nash equilibr
161.
by murbard2 10y ago
Why do you bring up expected value in the calculation. You may end up with the right result, but there's no good justification for why expected value should come into play.
162.
by murbard2 10y ago
1) There's no reason why you should assume every strategy is equally likely. It's absolutely not the case. When you play poker, do you assume your opponent play their cards randomly just because you don't know their strategy?
163.
by murbard2 10y ago
It's an interview question, you're free to ask for clarifications. That said, finding the Nash equilibrium is precisely the natural thing to do if you can't make assumptions about your opponent's strategy. It's a wo
164.
by murbard2 10y ago
Assume you're playing against me :)
165.
by murbard2 10y ago
Absolutely. I was inspired by non transitive dice to create the problem.
166.
by murbard2 10y ago
Indeed it is!
167.
by murbard2 10y ago
It isn't. There's a clear, well defined answer.
168.
by murbard2 10y ago
Here's my favorite interview question (spent 10 years as a quant, interviewed a bunch of people, most do not do well on this) We're going to play a game. You draw a random number uniformly between 0 and 1. If you like it, you can
169.
by murbard2 10y ago
Thank you, that was indeed my intent here. I don't want to take away anything from the achievement, but you explained it better than I did.
170.
by murbard2 10y ago
There is something you could do, liberalize building permits: if we can build housing, particularly tall buildings, the cost of apartments will remain low. But more importantly, liberalize rental leases. Why would you sit on prime investmen
171.
by murbard2 10y ago
These are smart people of course, but it's easy to get overly impressed by these results because all the scaffolding is missing. Behind such a result, there is a lot of tinkering, many leads going into dead ends. By the time you hit a
172.
by murbard2 10y ago
Usus, fructus, and abusus have been recognized as pillars of private property since the antiquity. "Abusus" is the right to destroy or dispose of a property. Certainly that would include not using it.
173.
by murbard2 10y ago
Have you considered that these people payed for their house fair and square and that it's profoundly unfair to charge them just because you and others don't like what they chose to do with it?
174.
by murbard2 10y ago
With app store for blockchain on cloud, just maybe.
175.
by murbard2 10y ago
This raises the question: what will blockchain mean for web?
176.
by murbard2 10y ago
I bet heavily on a Trump victory so, no, I don't think I'm out of touch. Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. - H. L. Mencken
177.
by murbard2 10y ago
No it isn't. http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=32058
178.
by murbard2 10y ago
I'm not denying that, I'm addressing the common misconception that it becomes a handicap past a certain point, or that it comes at the expense of some other traits.
179.
by murbard2 10y ago
It's uncommon, there are diminishing returns to IQ, and it is more striking when high IQ people do poorly, but in general the more you have the better off you are.
180.
by murbard2 10y ago
I apologize for the plug, but I invite folks who like OCaml to check-out Tezos, a project for a self-amending blockchain in OCaml. http://github.com/tezos I think it's a really neat piece of engineering that demonstrat

More ›