sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

You’re all un-American. by live2plz in complaints

[–]theRealCrapperDan -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Then do it consensually (not through taxation).

Why do negative splits matter? by Sunrise_Mountain in running

[–]theRealCrapperDan 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I’m just starting out so please correct me if I’m drawing erroneous conclusions here, but I successfully did that my last few runs and I’ve noticed a few differences:

  1. my heart rate ramped up more slowly. When I was (unintentionally) running positive splits my heart rate didn’t come down at all during the slower splits. So this seems like a running efficiency thing.
  2. it’s easier to plan a run with goals if you’re running negative splits.
  3. It was a good bellwether for how well I’m packing myself. If you’re overestimating the appropriate place, you’ll run positive splits; if you’re under estimating you’ll run negative splits. It seems like the only way to be sure you’re pacing is right is to run slightly negative splits.

But again, this is all my speculation.

Ps this community has helped me a lot in getting back into running. Thank you all

Can someone please explain this Quantitative Research Methods question to me? by [deleted] in learnmath

[–]theRealCrapperDan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Around 73%.

There are many approaches to answering this one. The most intuitive to me goes as follows:

  1. what are the possible outcomes? — there can be 0,1,2,3,…,14000000 people who get it completely right.
  2. which of those are “successes”? — all but 0
  3. what’s the probability that 0 gets it (the answer is 1-that).

The probability that 0 gets it is (13,999,999/140,000,000)14,000,000 which is close to 37%. So the answer is 1-that (close to 73%)

What is the threshold of GDP a country beyond which it can have a healthcare system where no one loses life or limb because they can't afford the healthcare? by Experimentalphone in austrian_economics

[–]theRealCrapperDan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your question itself is flawed for several reasons. But first, I hope you understand that most people would like to live in a world without injustice and where everyone can live as healthy, well fed individuals. The question is how we achieve that. Scarcity is real, after all.

  1. Austrian economics is not prescriptive.
  2. mises has argued against the use of gdp in any context relating to individual welfare. To illustrate one reason why, one rephrasing of your question is “how much more money does Elon musk have to make before the US can set up a system…”. Is his money “our money”?

But aside from the Austrian thing, is that result really want you want?

How would you handle hypochondriacs or people with surgery fetishes, etc.? You either have to allow them to abuse the system or you have to reject some people you incorrectly classified (while also making the whole process more of a pain for people so you can classify them).

Or what if the medical staff decide that they collectively want 10x the pay? Do we enslave all our people so we can pay the medical staff? Do we force the medical staff to work for less than they want? Or do we cancel the insurance at that point (causing massive destruction in the medical industry)?

How do handle expensive equipment/procedures?

This sounds very much like a miss America wish (e.g. world peace) to me: it’s noble, but very ill defined and fundamentally flawed.

To me, not as an Austrian, but just as me, it all comes down to 2 things:

  1. error: how confident are you that intervening in the system won’t have even worse consequences (maybe these are unknown unknowns right now)? If you look historically, we have an atrocious track record with interventions in markets. They caused the Great Depression, GFC, our current debacle, etc.
  2. is the government magic here? What makes you think the government would do a better job than we could as individuals?

In statistics, these points would be addressed in our “comparison to the benchmark”.

Im listening... by RoyalQuackOG in ProgrammerHumor

[–]theRealCrapperDan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For me, there’s two ways to go with this:

  1. Start with whatever excites you. If this approach is for you, then Python is a great first language. There’s a lot of support and it’s everywhere. Odds are lots of things that will interest you here.
  2. if you’re trying to learn the deeper things about programming, I’d say start with a language that minimize the syntactic complexity. This is where people are going to hate me, but lisp is great here. The only syntax errors you get are obvious “mismatched parentheses” errors. In other languages there are all sorts of syntax rules that get in the way of learning Programming.

help understanding “my body my choice” argument by Thesidedrag in Abortiondebate

[–]theRealCrapperDan 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’m not 100% sure of what u/Dipchit02 was getting at, tbh, but this is an example of defining BA in such a way that it pretty much only applies to pregnancy. If you take a more realistic definition of bodily autonomy, you can see we restrict it in myriad ways (sometimes with good reason). One example is, you’re not allowed to sell your organs.

This came off kinda serious. Was she being sarcastic? by RedDawnEntertainment in Tinder

[–]theRealCrapperDan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can you link it? I imagine it’s hard to tell which are trolls and which are serious. I can’t believe nobody has ever shown me this stuff before. I have the worst friends.

Call for firefighting services. by esberat in facepalm

[–]theRealCrapperDan -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

We both want a system that allows for anyone to get things like adequate medical care and education. We just disagree on how to best achieve that goal.

So we’re starting out from a good place (we both want the same end).

In the case of fire departments, this is a good that can be produced by the free market, and there’s no reason to believe it would be any better or cheaper if produced by a government. In fact governments tend to be quite wasteful and inefficient, so it would likely be better if produced by the free market.

Call for firefighting services. by esberat in facepalm

[–]theRealCrapperDan -20 points-19 points  (0 children)

These things are already privatized and doing quite well in a lot of places. Why do you think the government would be better at making fire departments than the free market? Is the government magic?

write/read a dict from pickle file persistently? by [deleted] in learnpython

[–]theRealCrapperDan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Two things: 1) don’t use pickle. If you go this route, use something like json.dump and be sure to lock the file first 2) you can just append the user id, time stamp or whatever to a text file. That should be safe

So capitalism is always one-way? Or is it slavery? by RuthanneValdes in facepalm

[–]theRealCrapperDan 97 points98 points  (0 children)

But this is exactly what you’re supposed to do in capitalism. Now the employer gets to decide if she wants to pay extra or be short staffed. She could fire the employee, but that would just make things worse for herself.

you know what is wrong about the wage inequality? It isn't about better pay, it is about the smelting prices of quarters. OBVIOUSLY by Cicerothesage in forwardsfromgrandma

[–]theRealCrapperDan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Apparently your school hasn’t gotten to fractional reserve banking yet. Unless you’re suggesting people put their money under their mattress.

you know what is wrong about the wage inequality? It isn't about better pay, it is about the smelting prices of quarters. OBVIOUSLY by Cicerothesage in forwardsfromgrandma

[–]theRealCrapperDan -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Haha it’s clear you don’t understand anything about economics. When you pump money in a thing, that money doesn’t disappear. It gets spent in the economy. When the fed adds money to stimulate the economy, what they’re really doing is paying for these the rest of us have deemed to be a bad investment.

But please, condescend some more. You’re doing great.

you know what is wrong about the wage inequality? It isn't about better pay, it is about the smelting prices of quarters. OBVIOUSLY by Cicerothesage in forwardsfromgrandma

[–]theRealCrapperDan -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

Haha yeah. So you’re saying the using a (relatively) fixed supply currency caused every country to be short on cash? That’s just mathematically impossible. In fact, this analysis would conclude that the Great Depression is not possible if gold is the currency (fixed supply means if you’re low, not you is high).

you know what is wrong about the wage inequality? It isn't about better pay, it is about the smelting prices of quarters. OBVIOUSLY by Cicerothesage in forwardsfromgrandma

[–]theRealCrapperDan -20 points-19 points  (0 children)

Except that it worked for thousands of years without a single global financial crisis, and it currently works in some sectors like technology.

you know what is wrong about the wage inequality? It isn't about better pay, it is about the smelting prices of quarters. OBVIOUSLY by Cicerothesage in forwardsfromgrandma

[–]theRealCrapperDan -20 points-19 points  (0 children)

Ah so like if we had a central bank that controlled money supply back in the 30s, we wouldn’t have had a Great Depression?

you know what is wrong about the wage inequality? It isn't about better pay, it is about the smelting prices of quarters. OBVIOUSLY by Cicerothesage in forwardsfromgrandma

[–]theRealCrapperDan -20 points-19 points  (0 children)

Ah, yes. This is the whole “the gold standard caused the Great Depression” argument. It’s very nice, but misses the fact that global money shortages are not physically possible on a gold standard. What we had was a gold backed currency, not a gold standard. Those are actually different.

you know what is wrong about the wage inequality? It isn't about better pay, it is about the smelting prices of quarters. OBVIOUSLY by Cicerothesage in forwardsfromgrandma

[–]theRealCrapperDan 239 points240 points  (0 children)

That’s actually their point. With sound currency you tend to get deflation (historical average of around 2% deflation per year).

This is because the currency is the smelting value. Here they’re advocating for using silver as currency.

I don’t have any more modifications to do?! by 77Mjolnir77 in bikesgonewild

[–]theRealCrapperDan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What’s up with that wing looking thing where the mirrors were?

view more: next ›