roenxi

25 ms·

481.
by roenxi 7mo ago
The obvious next step should probably be impeachment and removal from office. This seems to be the sort of situation was intended for. Elderly president goes completely off the rails one Friday and attempt to take out the global economy and
482.
by roenxi 7mo ago
I don't think this makes sense. You seem to be saying that a bank has to do all these things to control criminals while simultaneously arguing that there are simple methods criminals could use to bypass the banks (ie, deal in cash an
483.
by roenxi 7mo ago
> Alright, so does that mean we don't need KYC for ... bank accounts either? That sounds reasonable. A bank can just be an institution that holds money for people; they don't need to be all over their customer's business.
484.
by roenxi 7mo ago
> What about tolerance to avoid a meltdown of the core, specially under two events, an earthquake and a tsunami, exactly what happened after ignoring the warnings and requests to reinforce the safety. I wasn't going to reply but tha
485.
by roenxi 7mo ago
> The choice of DBA tsunami height was clearly an underestimate, and underestimates were identified for Fukushima and other plants prior to the accident but not acted upon. Not much of a swiss cheese failure then though. The failure is j
486.
by roenxi 7mo ago
> And those deaths very much count - you can't hand-wave away the consequences I don't. If it is what it looks like, the government officials that ordered/organised the evacuations should be harshly censured and the next t
487.
by roenxi 7mo ago
> Did you read the report I put? No, I'm just trusting that you'll be honest about what it is saying. I don't need to read a report to persuade myself that a 40 year old plant was designed based on the best available knowl
488.
by roenxi 7mo ago
> It was negligent to construct a nuclear plant at sea level, it was just a plant waiting to be flooded, So why did they build it there? It isn't a gentleman in a clown hat hitting himself on the head with a rubber mallet, they had
489.
by roenxi 7mo ago
I mean, ok. So say they build the plant 35m higher up, then get hit by a tsunami that is 36 meters higher [0] than the one that caused the Fukushima disaster? If we're going to start worrying about events outside the design spec we may
490.
by roenxi 7mo ago
> The decision process that produced that DBA was clearly faulty - the economic and social costs of the disaster so clearly have exceeded those of a building to a more serious DBA. That isn't clear at all. We're effectively sam
491.
by roenxi 7mo ago
If Fukushima get hit by a disaster that is outside the design spec then the engineering root cause of the failure is established. There isn't some detailed process needed to figure out how a design should tolerate out-of-design events.
492.
by roenxi 7mo ago
To be blunt; that isn't an appropriate application of the swiss cheese model to Fukushima. It isn't a swiss cheese failure if it was hit by an out-of-design-spec event. Risk models won't help there. Every engineered system ha
493.
by roenxi 7mo ago
> See, for instance, the space shuttle O-ring incident That wasn't really a result of an alignment of small weaknesses though. One of the reasons that whole thing was of particular interest was Feynman's withering appendix to t
494.
by roenxi 7mo ago
Yes. The argument is something like at some point in the future the conditions causing the happiness will be gone (probably quite soon, happiness is fleeting) and so will the feeling. If that transition away from happiness upsets you then i
495.
by roenxi 7mo ago
> Circular reasoning: that's true only if the posterior is normal, or if your "optimal" is defined by second moments. That doesn't sound right, it is an error minimising technique. Are we not talking about minimising
496.
by roenxi 7mo ago
On what principle would the Trump family's assets be seized? Just to pre-empt the idea that he corruptly became rich in office, that is actually fairly usual for US presidents to become suspiciously wealthy after their time in office [
497.
by roenxi 7mo ago
That isn't the case; mathematicians will do pages of calculations (particularly and especially the statisticians) if they can prove one approach is technically superior to another. These people, as a class, are the crazies who invented
498.
by roenxi 7mo ago
There's a couple of "ifs" there and the scenario seems implausible. If I look at the prime real estate in a city it tends to be a lot of skyscrapers rather than very large homes (with occasional exceptions like say a Buckingh
499.
by roenxi 7mo ago
Niceness is the wrong lens to use for acting in a civilised way. Game theory generally recommends cooperation; in practical real-world situations most of the games we play are ones where the best situation comes from negotiation. The issue
500.
by roenxi 7mo ago
Yeah but most people weren't on the internet access in the early 90s. It is more a 2005+ phenomenon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Internet_usage
501.
by roenxi 7mo ago
Does "the government doesn't get to decide what people can look at on the internet" count as C or D to you? It is the situation we've been in technically for 20 years now anyway; the world hasn't ended and it genera
502.
by roenxi 7mo ago
The sentiment reminds me of the people who believe that having so much prosperity that people feel comfortable not working all year around... represents some terrible threat that must be vigorously resisted for the greater good! Think of wh
503.
by roenxi 7mo ago
> I don't get the frustration with wayland (the protocol) in the comments. They took a firm principled stance against screenshots to start with, which set them up for the COVID WFH wave. Then we've got this questionable design
504.
by roenxi 8mo ago
I doubt they're pushing it; but if we're seeing roughly simultaneous introduction of similar laws in many countries then those organisations are probably organising the forums where the lobbying is being done.
505.
by roenxi 8mo ago
How likely is it that that can be avoided if, as in this context, the starting point is the current standard not being that great? It pretty much has to end in 2 different competing standards. Or there can be 2 different flavours of the exi
506.
by roenxi 8mo ago
That sounds like a way to not get any progress. The way I'm used to this sort of thing happening is some company brings in a new proprietary standard, makes bank, then all the competition bands together to form an open standard to try
507.
by roenxi 8mo ago
And if we're talking about 'if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about' - the other irony is they probably are doing something wrong. There are a lot of rules out there. The only reason it isn&
508.
by roenxi 8mo ago
If we accept that any one person can take responsibility for their feelings then it follows that everyone is responsible for their own mind. Otherwise what exactly are we saying? And emotions are complex, especially offence, it is practical
509.
by roenxi 8mo ago
... and then the dust settles and you discover that despite running though 7 scenarios the most any person has is 1 apple. And if one person has an apple, the other persons do not. Suggesting that affordability is not entirely a social cons
510.
by roenxi 8mo ago
> But what if they stop believing? That is what I'm asking you. Are you saying that you just want to use a different word capture the idea that only one person can have the apple? Because instead of saying Mr A can't afford the

More ›