ozziegooen
Joined 15 years ago
Joined 15 years ago
The danger isn't that humans will be replaced, it's that we'll be replaced by a paperclip maximizer
Thank you so much for working on this. Recently I've been experiencing significant repetitive stress. I am using a kinesis advantage keyboard and recently worked with a few physical therapists. I still feel pain.
I really like that by learning Plover, I may not only be reducing pain, but actually become a faster typer and coder. I just ordered a sidewinder keyboard, and I look forward to trying out this soon. I am prepared for a long learning curve, but by this point I am used to it and it seems like it will be worth the cost.
Graphics: 9/10 Pretty good, shadows and lighting effects portrayed quite well. Some really strange pixelation going on though. It's on a very small scale, but still noticeable with the right instruments and upsetting to the general public.
Sound: 6/10 Fantastic variety. Only works well for the first 2/3rds of the game or so, then becomes quite buggy.
Story: 2/10 It's not obvious if there is really a story going on here. Most players experience relatively little classical narrative, and that which does exist seems quite randomly or recklessly placed, possibly completely contrived from otherwise non-storylike events.
Multiplayer: 5/10 A wide variety of things to do with others, but many of them are considered quite boring or uninteresting. The gameplay mechanics sometimes seem to encourage active hostility or selfishness between players, which seems clearly suboptimal.
At most established nonprofits relatively little money actually goes to management. There have been a very few cases that have gotten a lot of publicity, but it's relatively a small (and dangerously over-stated) issue.
See Charity Navigator to see the 'management' costs, which are often quite small. http://www.charitynavigator.org/
That said, 'administrative expenses' are a notoriously poor way to measure nonprofits. The group GiveWell is known for attempting to rate charities based on impact. http://givewell.org/
Basically, A) The average charity doesn't spend that much on management. B) Even if the 'average' did, there are plenty that don't. C) Even so, try using 'impact' rather than 'administrative costs' D) There are many great causes to give to, and that's really all that matters here.
That said, I would typically expect large companies to have large biases to help local causes rather than the best things for the world.
There are quite a few people doing "Earning to Give", or earning as much money as possible and giving away 10-60% of it to the most efficient known causes. One can do quite a bit of good this way, it's actually quite difficult compete in the direct work you do.
Disclaimer: I'm currently doing an internship here. Think their take is quite unique in this way though. http://80000hours.org/blog
Some comments: 1) Want to choose a price range. $3k for a jacket? 2) When I click "Like", the animation to get a copy of a new one should be the same as when I click "Dislike", or at least in the same direction. I expect new items to always come from the right, them coming from the left in some cases is strange to me. 3) The default example "men's skinny jeans" should work as-is. It would also be useful if there were a button "Choose" or something on the home page.