thecage411
Joined 15 years ago
Karma
147
Submissions
80
Member since
Nov 7
Recent submissions
Comment · 4 years ago
What is the basis for the claim that income tax in NYS and CA pushed prices and income up? This seems extremely unlikely, unless you are looking at pretax income or something.
Comment · 4 years ago
That is overstating it a bit; there are mentions decades (but not centuries) after his reported death.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus has a good overview of the non biblical sources.
Comment · 5 years ago
This isn't accurate if you are talking about the federal level. A better model in terms of spending is that the federal government is an insurance company with an army.
The federal government spends something like 10 times as much on defense as direct educational expenditures and it's still significantly more than education if you include things like loan financing in education.
Comment · 8 years ago
What are the scientific Python ecosystem conventions that PyTorch breaks?
Comment · 9 years ago
Paris agreement is non-binding.
Who cares? What matters is if it's working or not. Of course it's hard to untangle if it's due to accords, scientific/engineering breakthroughs, government investment, etc. but India and China are far ahead of their Paris targets: https://insideclimatenews.org/news/15052017/china-india-pari...
China has no obligation for 20 years.
This statement is wrong in multiple ways. As you noted above, Paris is non-binding, so there are no "obligations" beyond developing a plan and reporting on progress. Next, China's goals begin in 2030, which is 13 years away, not 20. Finally, according to the link above, China is on pace to meet its goals almost a decade (!) in advance, i.e. early in the 2020s. So even a charitable interpretation of your statement looks to be wrong by about 4x.
It's not ratified by Congress.
This is as far as I can tell, just a negative thrown in that has nothing to do with the thesis. Is agreeing to the accords bad for the U.S. (cost billions!) or does it not matter, because it's not ratified. Which is it?
Nothing from agreeing to this was going to affect your descendants other than draining American coffers of billions.
So basically every other country is willing to drain their coffers. Why is that?
Comment · 9 years ago
there isn't a presidential election in 10 years.
Comment · 10 years ago
The correct answer is probably to allow car deliveries/parking at certain times of the day (late evening and early morning?) and have the streets be pedestrian/biker only outside of those hours.
Comment · 10 years ago
I'd guess most are more concerned that if they give you a private office, others will request one and they aren't equipped to give lots of private offices. And if they give just you one, it will cause resentment in the team that isn't worth it.
Comment · 10 years ago
What would be the choices now? Most references to alternatives suggest Haskell.
Comment · 10 years ago
A decent analogy for most governments is that they behave similarly to an insurance company with an army. You absolutely pay a percentage of the value of what you are insuring (here your life, wealth, earning potential) not a flat fee.
Comment · 11 years ago
Distributed Systems for Fun and Profit is pretty good: http://book.mixu.net/distsys/single-page.html.
Focuses on theory results that are applicable to real systems and analyzes those systems.
Comment · 11 years ago
They told you they rejected you because you don't have a degree from a top tier school?
Comment · 11 years ago
Not only that, but cause and effect isn't obvious either. Let's say there's some correlation between high ratios of debt / gdp (our proxy for "unsutainable levels of debt") and low growth. Is the low growth caused by the high debt or did the country get into high debt because they've had low growth (and thus lower than expected revenues)?
Comment · 11 years ago
I'm not sure you have demonstrated what you are trying to show.
If I understand correctly, you've calculated the chance a manager is promoted to director as 1/15 * average number of directors that leave over the relevant time period.
But you haven't made any argument about the chance an engineer is promoted to distinguished engineer besides stating promotion non rivalrous. A system in which no one is promoted to distinguished engineer is non rivalrous, for example.