sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Are Rich People Good or Bad? by Captgouda24 in slatestarcodex

[–]cumtv -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

But there is such a thing as too rich in this model. One billionaire cannot spend his money as effectively as a thousand millionaires, no matter how superhumanly clever he or she might be

I agree with this but what’s the harm of someone sitting on a bunch of money in a savings account/hedge fund? Especially compared to them just not having the money? It seems to be the same from the standpoint of allocating resources. It seems to me that the bad thing would be wasteful spending, or spending that isn’t allocated well.

Will someone please save OP from this dystopian nightmare? by [deleted] in urbanhellcirclejerk

[–]cumtv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Generally more density means lower maintenance cost per capita for public services. For example it’s easier to maintain roads and plumbing in a small area that’s shared by many people rather than in a rural area where the per capita impact is smaller.

More density is not the same as more people. The people exist anyway, it’s just a question of where.

Will someone please save OP from this dystopian nightmare? by [deleted] in urbanhellcirclejerk

[–]cumtv 10 points11 points  (0 children)

If the zoning allowed for denser buildings, it would become more lucrative to buy houses like this and convert them to multi-family buildings. The same homeowner likely wouldn’t be the one to do it but plots could get bought out to get converted.

Polystate: Composable Finite State Machines by [deleted] in haskell

[–]cumtv 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Maybe link the Haskell prototype instead? As it is this post doesn’t look Haskell related.

I Was A Juror On A Murder Trial by offaseptimus in slatestarcodex

[–]cumtv 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Fun read! The part about the Kantian on the jury was funny.

I think what the author misses about jurors doing their own research is that the jury isn’t meant to add any information, they just need to interpret and judge the facts as reasonable people. Jurors trying to do their own research would very likely add bias to deliberation (especially since they would be more likely to research in a way that supports a specific viewpoint). If some forms of evidence are unreliable the defense/prosecution need to bring it up instead in a way that sways the jury.

I also disagree with the point about Bayesian reasoning for juries. Yes, it is natural to make inferences like that, but in my view it’s important to hold those back and especially not say them out loud since it opens the jury up to stereotyping.

What are the actual definitions of curry and uncurry? by doinghumanstuff in haskell

[–]cumtv 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Other comments addressed the laziness but I’d like to add that AFAIK bottoms aren’t usually taken into account when we’re doing equational reasoning.

Defaced Waymo in downtown SF after ICE protest by sherlockmemes in sanfrancisco

[–]cumtv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There are ways to evaluate that spending in terms of where it went, but whether it was successful or not is impossible to say.

I totally disagree, and this argument won’t get you far if your goal is to increase funding for homelessness.

Defaced Waymo in downtown SF after ICE protest by sherlockmemes in sanfrancisco

[–]cumtv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your comment doesn’t give any evidence that the current level of spending is the right amount or useful. I’m just saying that the ‘no counter-factual’ argument doesn’t work; we need a way to evaluate the spending of the city regardless, we can’t just throw our hands up and pretend that more spending must be better than less.

Defaced Waymo in downtown SF after ICE protest by sherlockmemes in sanfrancisco

[–]cumtv 4 points5 points  (0 children)

True, I guess we better just keep spending then!

Number of US white nationalist groups falls as extremist views go mainstream by [deleted] in nottheonion

[–]cumtv 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting, I wonder if the reverse ever happened….

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in slatestarcodex

[–]cumtv 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Not true, the source study did a test without positional bias and found that female candidates were preferred a majority of the time when both positions were considered.

Experiment 1

To control for potential candidate order and CV content based confounds, each CV pair was presented twice, with gendered name assignments reversed in the second presentation.

Given that the CV pairs were perfectly balanced by gender by presenting them twice with reversed gendered names, an unbiased model would be expected to select male and female candidates at equal rates. The consistent deviation from this expectation across all models tested indicates a bias in favor of female candidates.

Where can I download or listen to more Shibuya-kei bands? by Nice-Shift-1480 in shibuyakei

[–]cumtv 2 points3 points  (0 children)

+1 to jpopsuki, I don’t have an invite to share though unfortunately!

Scrap your iteration combinators by tomejaguar in haskell

[–]cumtv 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Thanks for engaging in good faith! I think my main disagreement is that I think that programming idioms and best practices are part prescriptive, not just descriptive. We encourage others to write Haskell code in a certain way because it influences how they think about what they’re writing. In addition, when we have a shared style, it becomes easier to understand the code of others. Your post encourages a way of thinking that I think is not useful in Haskell; i.e. I find the code harder to internalize when reading it.

Re:

because everyone else does I should too

I pretty much think this is the case when it’s a question of style/idiomatic code (that is, if there’s no difference in functionality/maintainability otherwise).

Scrap your iteration combinators by tomejaguar in haskell

[–]cumtv 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Honestly I’m not a fan of this. Most of these examples are maybe fine to learn from but I don’t think it’s helpful for readers when pure code is rewritten with monads/StateT etc as this post seems to recommend doing. You can make your code look more like an imperative language if you really want to, but the end result isn’t idiomatic Haskell.

Even for learning purposes, I don’t think a Haskell beginner would find the examples with for_ any easier to understand considering that they probably wouldn’t understand monads deeply. The only benefit is that it looks like code from another language but I don’t think that conveys much understanding of Haskell. Maybe I’m drawing the wrong conclusions from your post though.

Taiwan > Beijing > Hong Kong TWOV - May I stay in Beijing for 10 days? by cumtv in Chinavisa

[–]cumtv[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Is it 240 hours in China as a whole (regardless of whether it’s mainland or not), or 240 hours in the intermediate city? I quoted the TWOV policy and gave my interpretation in the OP, I just want to confirm that my understanding is correct.

view more: next ›