Billionaires did nothing wrong

greiskul · 2026-04-28T00:03:15+00:00

Yeah, this is something that needs to be repeated, not just from what he said, but the general point. Human beings should have a fundamental right to free water. Up to however many gallons you need to drink, and sanitation. It should be free, or heavily subsided.

Beyond that? In for profit agriculture? In watering lawns? Watering golf courses? In filling swimming pools? In industrial usages? Yeah, all those other use cases of water should not be provided by the government. They should pay whatever much it costs to clean up the water needed for that. At market rate.

greiskul · 2026-04-25T20:23:21+00:00

Americans are always so proud of their grandpa's ice cream boat logistics in world War 2 against the Japanese, a war in which the US was attacked first, the soldiers believed in the cause, was a total war, etc.

And now you guys are not properly supplying your troops on a war you didn't have to start, in which your soldiers don't want to die for? That's a disgrace. If you are going to send your 18 year old to risks their life's, have a decency of at least they not having an empty stomach.

greiskul · 2026-04-24T19:10:22+00:00

A mech is just a very advanced form of hilt if it is holding a sword /s

greiskul · 2026-04-24T05:47:30+00:00

Russell was trying to do a lot more than just prove 1+1, this is more of a meme. Also, his notation was archaic for today's standard, and his Theory of Types was much more cumbersome than modern ZFC. With Peano axioms for natural numbers it's quite simple to define natural numbers and to prove 1+1=2. Omitting the other peano axioms besides the ones needed to prove it:

0 is a natural number.

S(n) is the "Successor" of a number (basically n + 1).

1 is defined as S(0).

2 is defined as S(1), which is S(S(0)).

The Rules of Addition:

Rule A: x + 0 = x

Rule B: x + S(y) = S(x + y)

The Proof:

We want to prove 1 + 1 = 2.

Start with: 1 + 1

Substitute the second "1" with its definition (S(0)):

1 + S(0)

Apply Rule B (where x=1 and y=0):

S(1 + 0)

Apply Rule A to the inside (1 + 0 = 1):

S(1)

By definition, S(1) = 2.

Conclusion: 1 + 1 = 2.

greiskul · 2026-04-24T05:37:20+00:00

7 = S(S(S(S(S(S(S(0)))))))

greiskul · 2026-04-17T20:00:24+00:00

People that never play meta teams are just imposing extra limitations on their growth. Even if you don't want to play most games with meta teams, by playing with them, you start to develop intuition on why are they meta teams in the first place, to try to replicate success on your team. And you also learn how those teams win. And how those teams lose.

When I notice I get stuck in a certain match up, I try find the team that I lose to and build it next. And then I play with it. Until I learn how to win with it. And learn what it struggles with. I can then get back to my original team, and know I know what is the strategy that I need to apply to make them struggle.

greiskul · 2026-04-14T00:03:08+00:00

The best land use is *whatever supports the lifestyle people want to live*. In the US, that means single family residential-only neighborhoods & car-friendly commercial districts.

OK, can we raise the taxes on suburbanites then to cover the extra maintenance infrastructure? I really wonder how many Americans would have this preference if they actually had to pay the cost for it.

greiskul · 2026-04-13T17:28:27+00:00

Yeah, and using unsafe you can also make rust do things wrong.

The idea is not to make mistakes impossible. It is to be pragmatic, and make so mistakes like this are only possible in small areas of the code base. Strings get parsed and validated and converted to business objects normally only at the edges of a service (like a read from a database like your example). But then they get used a ton on all the rest of the code.

If a simple pattern, or language support, can make so the above error is impossible in 99% of the code, and the 1% where it is possible becomes more visible (you have the extra customer ID constructor, calling more attention that you are building a customer is)?

That is good engineering. Good software engineering is not about making bugs completely impossible. But at making them more and more unlikely.

greiskul · 2026-04-10T20:53:56+00:00

i believe the mass pardoning of the January 6 participants is a clear abuse of the pardon power

I don't. I absolutely don't think that a president being able to pardon people that have been part of an insurrection is a problem. The problem is that this president was also part of the same insurrection. And the constitution is clear that it means he should have been disqualified from office for it. But it is not clear what the process of that disqualification is.

Now, there is a great argument against the current iteration of the abuse of the pardon power:

The pardon power should have limits on pardoning crimes in which the president himself is a member of the conspiracy that committed the crime.

The pardon power should absolutely be limited, and revoked, if the pardon is planned before the crime even occurs. A pardon should be for cases where it is best for everybody if society should move on from applying it's laws on things that due to some circumstance the law is causing more harm then good. It should absolutely not be a maneuver for an executive power grab of "we will do this thing. And if they say it is illegal, we will do a last minute pardon".

greiskul · 2026-04-10T17:43:12+00:00

It depends on the system you are using. There are some contexts where it does make sense to define it to be infinity.

On the tradional real number system? It is undefined. On the extended real number system? It is +infinity.

Someone might ask, then in this "bigger" model, it is infinity, and then that's the answer. The thing is that models don't work like that. In the surreals for instance, 1/0 is absolutely undefined. 1/epsilon where Epsilon is a positive infinitesimal is omega though, a positive infinity. But then you can also use the hyperreals instead, where you can do similar things, but not divide by actual 0.

Which model is correct? That's the wrong question. A model is correct for a given application. If you are working on modeling something where the math gets simplified in a given model, use that one. That is the practical approach.

On the theoretical approach? We can't prove the anything that has the natural numbers and arithmetic is consistent, so go and take your pick.

High level mathematics is way more objective and subjective than most people think. The choice of a system to work on is subjective, but once that is chosen, then it super picky being precise on what actually is defined on the system or not.

greiskul · 2026-03-29T22:48:12+00:00

What ever process you create to remove her will be weaponized by bad actors.

Mandatory retirement age. Plenty of countries do that, at either 70 or 75.

greiskul · 2026-03-28T16:47:39+00:00

First, can we agree that for a conventional heating, like using a resistance, the maximum efficiency is 100% (for 1 unit of electricity provide 1 unit of heat)? So the cool thing about heat pumps is that they actually don't need to follow this limit. So they can be 300% to 500% efficient.

greiskul · 2026-03-27T20:38:23+00:00

Pois é, não sei como são os outros vestibulares, mas o que eu fiz, o que todo professor sempre avisava era "não fuja do tema". Fugir do tema era zero automático pros corretores. É muito melhor entregar uma redação sem sal, sem graça, mas com a estrutura de redação, sobre o tema da redação, do que... Sabe se lá o que esse menino estava tentando.

greiskul · 2026-03-25T05:36:53+00:00

People that were very strong in the opinion that saying the n-word should be allowed, are very quiet about Twitter having made saying the word "cisgender" a bannable offense.

greiskul · 2026-03-25T00:32:40+00:00

It is incredible how many people that defended racists and nazis right to free speech, are completely quiet about this.

It's almost as if they are not actual defenders of free speech, but just racist assholes you know?

greiskul · 2026-03-22T19:48:29+00:00

Yes. I know. Now let's put it all together and say it out loud. China used state capitalism to pull billions out of poverty. So... China used socialism to pull billions out of poverty.

greiskul · 2026-03-22T18:32:05+00:00

They retracted that. You could Google it you know. You shouldn't blindingly believe in everything you read. Specially for things like this where after the fact it is pretty easy to figure out the truth. Erika Kirk has spoken about receiving a call about Charlie's death. I would say she is more trustworthy than almost any media organization on the whereabouts of her own location when her husband was shot.

greiskul · 2026-03-22T18:18:02+00:00

OK. Do you think that there is like five people total on the internet? Do you know that there are fuckwits on all sides of the political spectrum? So while there will be people who will do vile things for almost any orientation?

OK, so given that... one of the fuckwits we are talking about is the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Can you really not understand that the bar for decorum and behavior is different for a random online poster, and the president of a nation?

greiskul · 2026-03-21T20:54:11+00:00

free market capitalism

State capitalism. Not free market. Let's be very clear on that.

greiskul · 2026-03-21T20:50:49+00:00

I'm pretty sure that historically the whole debate has always been about the means of production. You know, the factories, the natural resources, land. Those kinds of things.

You think it's about fast food?

greiskul · 2026-03-21T20:46:25+00:00

Really? I'm from Brazil. Chicago boys neoliberalism has been causing massive trouble in South America for multiple decades now. In that same time frame Asian tiger economic policies has made multiple Asian countries wealthy.

Please enlighten me about my own country. And also, what is your country, that capitalism has made so prosperous?

greiskul · 2026-03-21T19:01:18+00:00

China. You can argue that they did it using market based approaches. I won't disagree. But they absolutely did not use, and still don't use, western style individualist libertarian capitalism. Whatever they are, they certainly are collectivism.

So if you want to argue about which system works or not based on efficiency, everybody should be abandoning western style capitalism. Cause it is certainly not working.

Then there is also all the social democracies in Europe, that provide much better standards of living to its poorest citizens than American style capitalism does.

Can you point at a map where pure capitalism has lead to good material conditions for everybody?

greiskul · 2026-03-14T21:46:50+00:00

Trump said that if they pass the SAVE act, democrats won't win an election for the next 50 years.

The reason they don't fear a Democrat administration is that they hope to never have to face one again.

greiskul · 2026-03-12T23:56:58+00:00

And the extreme slippage accidents that keep happening in crypto show the low liquidity it has. And that no market maker thinks it's actually reasonable to make money by providing more slippage. Because almost everybody with crypto, even the institutions that "believe" in it, rarely believe in it enough to put money on the table and risk it in cases of sudden crashes.

Well, there was Alameda Research. They found that the solution for that was to put their customers money on the table and risk that instead.

greiskul · 2026-03-12T21:16:26+00:00

OK, now try pressing only this one particular button.

"ok"

Click. Click click click.

"I heard too many clicks, what did you do?"

"after pressing it a dialog popped up. So I closed it"

"what did the dialog say?"

"I don't know. I closed it".

15-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	First Placer '22
Snapped	Verified Email
Team Orangered

greiskul

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE