wyager

20 ms·

361.
by wyager 3y ago
That's what we do for night vision goggles. https://tnvc.com/shop/ab-night-vision-lpbp-go/
362.
by wyager 3y ago
Yes, China is basically doing the opposite of what the EU is doing (acting in the economic interest of domestic firms) and they're eating the EU's lunch as a result
363.
by wyager 3y ago
Even more bizarre, then, that EU regulators can tank American deals
364.
by wyager 3y ago
Unfortunately for the EU, there are still places in the world that are comfortable with success. Every time the EU tanks some local company, or prevents it from being viable in the first place, that productivity just goes to the US or China
365.
by wyager 3y ago
> Also, as Engineers we know that cost is related not just to simplicity but scale. Your dream car will never be at the cost you or like minded people will buy because it may be simple and featureless, but it will be expensive. Cars very
366.
by wyager 3y ago
Your car also shouldn't ding at you if it detects weight on a seat without a seatbelt.
367.
by wyager 3y ago
American NHTSA backup camera regulations effectively ban new cars without a touch screen, sadly.
368.
by wyager 3y ago
You phrase your comment as if that doesn't work. The fact that I have a (mostly unused) guestroom absolutely does increase the number of guests I get. The fact that I have a mountain bike (mostly used for commuting) absolutely does inc
369.
by wyager 3y ago
> In the hard cold reality that we live in, it's not sustainable or feasible for everyone to own a huge hulking gas guzzling vehicle just to enable your yearly road trip. Wish it was, but it isn't. Not even close. It actually i
370.
by wyager 3y ago
The entire point of ownership is to hedge against right-tail demand scenarios. If you don't care about them, you should just rent everything and own nothing at all. "Own nothing and be happy", as they say. You will just occas
371.
by wyager 3y ago
> were based on the best available scientific recommendations at the time "Best" is doing a lot of heavy lifting in this sentence. A more objective description might be "most widely expressed".
372.
by wyager 3y ago
> there were also overflowing hospitals in 99.9% of the country The hysteria over "overflowing hospitals" was mostly due to people not understanding the base rate of hospital occupancy, or how hospitals account for occupancy li
373.
by wyager 3y ago
> shallower pools of capital Why do you think all the capital is allocated in the US? Because we don't smother as many companies to death > It’s no more difficult to start a tech company in Europe than it is in the US, and it’s g
374.
by wyager 3y ago
> This distinction is meaningless. Only if you subscribe to the most naive grade-school model of democracy. A government isn't actually the will of the people made manifest; it's an organization made up of people, processes, an
375.
by wyager 3y ago
The first runaway "AIs", so to speak, may be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waqf which are like an early Islamic version of the modern trust. These Waqfs grew so large that at times, they controlled a signific
376.
by wyager 3y ago
That may be the case, but that's not germane to our discussion, which concerns whether it's bad to fire people who don't do their job. This is a normative discussion, not a descriptive one.
377.
by wyager 3y ago
I mean only "excluded" stocks. I specifically want to make money off slippage losses etc. from activist funds selling stocks for activism reasons.
378.
by wyager 3y ago
Government employees do not work for the nebulous collective will of the population. They work for the government, which is a structured entity.
379.
by wyager 3y ago
> What is this entity that compels government employees to work? Typically the entity that compels employees to to their job (or be fired) is their employer. That is, in fact, the defining relationship between employees and employers.
380.
by wyager 3y ago
No, it's not a problem when government employees are required to do their job.
381.
by wyager 3y ago
Anyone know of an ETF that buys stocks excluded by activist funds?
382.
by wyager 3y ago
I used 'X' per se specifically because I am making a generalized example. The proposition is absurd for all X.
383.
by wyager 3y ago
Read the article, or any of the stuff I quoted. This is more widely-reaching than "you aren't allowed to throw things away" (which would also have a sumptuary effect, although more indirect).
384.
by wyager 3y ago
When there are two parties to a transaction, it doesn't really matter which party you forbid from making the transaction. The effect is the same, which is all that really matters from an economic standpoint
385.
by wyager 3y ago
"This law doesn't prevent consumers from buying X, it prevents vendors from selling X" The bulk of your comment is just an explanation of why you think sumptuary laws can be good (which may be correct! Not arguing that), not
386.
by wyager 3y ago
> "It is time to end the model of 'take, make, dispose' that is so harmful to our planet, our health and our economy." ... "New products will be designed in a way that benefits all, respects our planet and protec
387.
by wyager 3y ago
The public behavior of their CEO makes me very skeptical of their public claims about this OS. The CEO has tons of tweets along the lines of (not really exaggerating) "my OS is perfect and cannot be hacked. I have XYZ certification. I
388.
by wyager 3y ago
There's a difference between "not black and white" and "replication crisis". Nutrition studies suffer from a replication crisis.
389.
by wyager 3y ago
The output of nutrition science (using the word "science" loosely - the epistemic standard is not very high) must be examined with the understanding that the field is extraordinarily biased by religious and political considerati
390.
by wyager 3y ago
> I‘ve come to realise more and more that most people reason out of belief first and arguments second on a lot of things (maybe most things?) Climate change deniers are an obvious example Do you think most climate change believers reason

More ›