topaz0

26 ms·

451.
by topaz0 3y ago
The proposal is clear from the comment if you read it: it's not a proposal about a socioeconomic system, but about how to analyze socioeconomic systems. Namely, that we shouldn't just think about the first-order consequences of th
452.
by topaz0 3y ago
Not that would add to the present conversation. Please take your goading elsewhere.
453.
by topaz0 3y ago
I'm not sure what gave you the impression that I was proposing something in my comments.
454.
by topaz0 3y ago
You have not understood what I said. I'm not talking about unappealing features of the idealized version of capitalism that GP is lionizing. I'm talking about how capitalism as described brings about the conditions that undermine
455.
by topaz0 3y ago
Capitalism contains the seeds of its own destruction. "the invisible hand" sounds good and all, but the problem is that if the owners of capital control the profits produced by the mobilization of capital, then money and power wil
456.
by topaz0 3y ago
And then "zzzzz" when the fanboys jump in to justify
457.
by topaz0 3y ago
Ah yes, they're one of those old-fashioned outfits that uses its own website to present themselves.
458.
by topaz0 3y ago
Last I checked a tweet isn't a real life cat any more than an electron is.
459.
by topaz0 3y ago
Right. The point is that capitalism is the economic system built to optimally remove money from you and redistribute it to owners. So sure the idea wouldn't work because it would be making the game explicit (as you say, "too on th
460.
by topaz0 3y ago
It's good to be skeptical of this kind of claim of course, but part of the point of the article in my view is that the narrative is pretty credulous when you say this about writers or programmers or artists -- i.e. people who do not co
461.
by topaz0 3y ago
> forced Only if you consider it to be inevitable that their primary goal is to make themselves and their owners preposterously rich.
462.
by topaz0 3y ago
This is a great and underappreciated point: the person giving the criticism has a lot of power in determining whether or not you take it personally. I would add that having good mentors who give criticism in this way also helps you to inter
463.
by topaz0 3y ago
That's a pretty modern development. Older cookbooks, including classics that are just as good or better than anything being written now, don't have photos, and rarely have illustrations.
464.
by topaz0 3y ago
https://imslp.org/wiki/Category:For_guitar
465.
by topaz0 3y ago
It wouldn't crush you or anything, but it would be notable. Just like the difference between sea level and 2km above sea level is quite notable.
466.
by topaz0 3y ago
My lab has one of these with paper monitoring the temperature of our cold room.
467.
by topaz0 3y ago
"crypto" was used to mean cryptography long before it was used to mean currency, and in some circles still primarily means cryptography.
468.
by topaz0 3y ago
Might be better to remove the #TtoDt from the url so we start at the top of the page -- I think it is included by mistake.
469.
by topaz0 3y ago
Absolutely there are reasons to choose to do your rounding in a particular way for a particular purpose. I was only making the point that the argument for using fixed point decimal that is laid out in the post had nothing to do with the cho
470.
by topaz0 4y ago
I get what you're saying about the representation, but I think it's fair to say COBOL numbers are stored as decimal fixed point. i.e. it stores a certain number of digits, and the least-significant digit always has the same place
471.
by topaz0 4y ago
As far as I can tell this point about the benefits of fixed point is very confused. The difference here is entirely because they use fixed point numbers with higher precision than the precision of standard floats. You could get the same ben
472.
by topaz0 4y ago
Here's some reading about how much propaganda there has been for gas in the last century or so: https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2021/06/how-the-foss...
473.
by topaz0 4y ago
I want the government to always be balancing the good of society against my individual freedom. These people are saying "this limits my freedom" and ignoring the societal benefits. That's disingenuous. And you can tell it&#x2
474.
by topaz0 4y ago
To be clear, I used to believe the gas stove propaganda myself. I too, like GP, had the feeling that gas was self-evidently better than electric, and that it wasn't possible to have an argument about it. Then I tried being open-minded
475.
by topaz0 4y ago
If you try to do exactly what you were doing on the gas stove in the same way, you will have a bad time, but my and many other people's experience is that a decent electric stove is perfectly capable of making good food once you figure
476.
by topaz0 4y ago
No, but I will be by the end of next week.
477.
by topaz0 4y ago
There are many ways that outrage can be fake, and a variety of them apply to this situation. For one thing the conservative talking points were all about a sense that the feds were coming for your freedom, and not in any way about the merit
478.
by topaz0 4y ago
A big part of the reason for banning gas is not energy but indoor pollution. There's pretty strong and growing evidence that cooking with gas leads to substantial health risks because of various combustion products that end up in your
479.
by topaz0 4y ago
I would have thought the "few parameter" high-error region corresponds more naturally to the part of language learning where the learner overgeneralizes and thinks everything is regular, and the "many parameter" high-err
480.
by topaz0 4y ago
Note that the article is almost 20 years old, so it is more like 10 years for industry adoption.

More ›