superqd

10 ms·

31.
by superqd 7y ago
I only see a mostly empty web page. Nothing does anything. Just checked the dev console, and there was a FirebaseError: quota exceeded.
32.
by superqd 7y ago
Solipsism embeds a lot of un-articulated axioms in "I". The author's point is valid in that respect, that we need more axioms than just "I am", which is true, and they are all smuggled into our definition of what w
33.
by superqd 7y ago
yeah, I didn't actually read the entire article because of this.
34.
by superqd 7y ago
yeah, that is pretty much the business model of companies that sell personality assessments for employment screening. Just find some legal bullshit to sell.
35.
by superqd 7y ago
One of the deep problems in assessing whether or not something like Clairvoyance is real is that there is no way to know the difference between extreme luck and the output of a truly new fundamental ability. It's especially difficult
36.
by superqd 7y ago
From an early age, my dad told my brothers and me, ALL the time that we should never hit a girl or woman. Ever. He drilled into us that there is never a reason to do this. Fast forward to high school and college, and I freeze when a woman
37.
by superqd 7y ago
Yeah, that is a good point. It does seem to come up a lot in regards to data formats, that of how human readable they are. So I don't think it's without value, but shouldn't be what they are optimized for since it's us
38.
by superqd 7y ago
I stopped reading at the example describing how to provide an org chart relation as XML. The argument here failed for me, and made the notion of what is "clean" code or "clean" structure even more subjective than ever.
39.
by superqd 7y ago
Let's say you have 1 year left to live. You have two things you want to do, X and Y, but X and Y take 1 year each to complete . It is the end result you want, but each result takes 1 year achieve, and you only have 1 year left to li
40.
by superqd 7y ago
The investor is not the least bit worse off. He gains what the worker loses, and the worker gains what the investor loses. The worker gains the 100k, but the investor gains the extra year of work. That is, the investor, effectively, gets
41.
by superqd 7y ago
The problem is you missed the full comparison. Person A has not the time to invest into building the product, so they invest money, 100k's worth of dollars. Person B has not the money to invest into building the product, so they invest
42.
by superqd 7y ago
If the investor is paid for their dollars, then they aren't owed anything for them either by the same logic. And they most definitely are paid. Investors are compensated for their dollars because they exchange those dollars for time
43.
by superqd 7y ago
I feel sorry for all of us who believe that money is the only thing of value that was traded in the exchange. Which essentially is your same point, I know. All those who say, "yeah, but they got paid, the investor risked their money&q
44.
by superqd 7y ago
If they didn't risk their time, then the investor didn't risk their money, since they too got paid for it. Investors put in money to get something of equal value back: time. That is why there is no difference. Both parties w
45.
by superqd 7y ago
What is always overlooked is that Person A was also compensated for their dollars . Person A put in 100k and was compensated for those dollars. They didn't trade their 100k for nothing, they traded it for 100k of something of equal
46.
by superqd 7y ago
No, that doesn't mean that at all. If a company fails, investors don't have to return the time they've invested by putting in extra years of work, so it follows that those who invested time wouldn't return the money the
47.
by superqd 7y ago
I think the problem is that it's often difficult to pinpoint the crux of the unfairness, but still feel it all the same. In my opinion, the unfairness is engendered by the realization that time and money are merely different units of
48.
by superqd 7y ago
I agree. The idea that time is not risked as an investment is, IMHO, deeply weak minded. Dollars, when used to purchase labor, are essentially acting as concentrated time. It's like a conversion from matter to energy and back. Walk
49.
by superqd 7y ago
There is a deep flaw in this logic. Person A and Person B are both investing the same amount, just in different forms. Person A converted their 100k into 1 year of time . Person B converted their 1 year of time into 100k of money . They
50.
by superqd 7y ago
I'm pretty sure it wouldn't happen with the term Dark Hypothesis, or Dark Inconsistency. Or something cooler than those :^) . I think the words 'matter' and 'energy' are the confusion because they are alread
51.
by superqd 7y ago
I've had a number of discussions with lay-folk who think we have in fact discovered a new/exotic form of matter. That is what gets lost. What we have discovered is that something went wrong in our predictions, which could be e
52.
by superqd 7y ago
I understand one hypothesis is that it is some sort of matter, but the anomaly is that we can't fully account for why galaxies don't fly apart, given our current models and observables. One explanation for the anomaly is that t
53.
by superqd 7y ago
Yeah, basically that happens. I ran into this in school as well, as some professors accepted the current models as reality , which is what made me so sad in grad school when I realized how untrue this was. I think of physics as a program.
54.
by superqd 7y ago
So, yeah, I like this a lot. I have a degree in physics, but have been writing software for a very long time now. This resonates with me. Though in this case, the new feature may be dropped when it turns out it really doesn't work.
55.
by superqd 7y ago
Some experiments are literally looking for new types of matter that could play a role in interacting with observable/known matter than could potentially explain the overall observations. Some folks are also tinkering with the models&#
56.
by superqd 7y ago
Yeah, to me having a more interesting discussion in a public forum (news shows, or other) would be about this sort of thing. Until we have dark matter in our hands or have reproduced this new weird matter in a lab, there still remains the
57.
by superqd 7y ago
Yeah, I know. It's just a little frustrating, as I have had relatives be confused by this, thinking scientists have discovered new forms of matter, and have asked me questions about it - only to be disappointed. I was disappointed with
58.
by superqd 7y ago
Yes, the inconsistencies are not named thus, but the explanation for the inconsistencies are poorly communicated. Saying they are particles says too much, we don't yet know that there are other 'dark' particles either. We o
59.
by superqd 7y ago
So, there is large quantity of matter permeating the universe with unknown properties? Doesn't that imply that our understanding, i.e., theories/models, are inconsistent with observation? All the the term 'dark matter'
60.
by superqd 7y ago
Yeah, I don't think the physicists are confused about the terms, it's the use of the words in the popular lexicon that I think breeds confusion, and sometimes causes a missed opportunity for educating the public on how science wor

More ›