HN is not a healthy community for me to participate in, but it's got high variance output to a greater degree than anything except my Twitter follow group and my Slack private groups - i.e. it's the highest quality uncurated source I have.
The reason I say that it is not healthy is that it is full of misinformation and sensationalism. I get upset at reading things I know are lies or errors perpetuated through confident ignorance and end up attempting to even it out by sensationalizing the other side (and perhaps in my anger doing some of the things that annoy me). I've noticed this weird behaviour in my parents arguing with their friends about politics and for the most part I'd removed myself from that but HN brings it forth.
What is valuable about HN is that you get some real experts talking about stuff they know well and startup entrepreneurs engage here in a way that's often closer than just posting on ProductHunt, and I like talking to other people like that.
Actually, thank you for asking this question, I think it's pretty obvious at this point that I should just stop using this website. But I needed the question to be asked. Should just use that time building and spend it on my private groups.
thanks for the reply, I think the point you make about having noticed yourself 'doing some of the things that annoy' you is helpful to see be brought up, and I'm wondering if you can say more about 'confident ignorance', as well as 'weird behavior' you have made an effort to 'remove' yourself from but that HN 'brings...forth'?
It's a lousy assumption then. Ick. Expect better of parents.
I yelled at my special-needs son for opening the oven door and using it as a stepping stool to see what I was cooking. I wasn't mad. I was scared he would climb on it while the oven was hot.
Because I wasn't mad and he heard me yell "no!!!" at full volume, he thought that's just how you pronounced the word and yelled it the first two weeks he began using it. I would look at him funny and he would look funny like "Did I pronounce it wrong?" After two weeks, he stopped yelling the word.
There is supposed to be something at the back of the stove to prevent it from tipping over. Ours had a little device that surrounded one of the feet to do this. The installer said it was now required by law.
Exactly, a SaaS product is the ultimate DRM and it's socially acceptable. Make this a native app that needs always-on internet and customers who care about it being native will flip and eat your margins like a giant Pareto Pacman.
When deciding 'did something happen?' I need the sources to be generally reliable about fact reporting because they do not rely on pure reason. For fact reporting which is an aggregate, I need to rely upon the track record of the sources. In this case, some of the second-level sources are from the Cato Institute, which I know to be low trust source of truth[0].
This means I have to assign this a low-magnitude coefficient of trust (not a high-magnitude negative coefficient[1]).
That means what you're describing could well be true. I just don't know it based on who's saying it.
I am unfamiliar with the history of that particular document. I don't really want to get into the question of climate change here.
Nonetheless, I see what you mean about high vs. low magnitude coefficient trust. Personally, I don't assign a particularly high-magnitude coefficient for Cato either. However, I don't assign a particularly high magnitude coefficient to any economic/political think tank. For two reasons:
1. Economics is not a science in any meaningful sense of the word. There is no empirical process for falsifying theories; there is merely a dialectic. Now, the dialectic can be more or less rigorous, but there is an upper-bound to the level of certainty that dialectic can provide.
2. Everyone has an agenda. This is inescapable when it comes to politics. The best we can hope for is that all parties demonstrate some self-awareness of that fact.
Relative to plenty of other sources, I would say that Cato ranks relatively well. At the very least, they are one of the most respectable libertarian sources, and should probably be taken seriously (even if you disagree with them).
Drug is 8 cents a pill produced generic in India. They aren’t going to export it any more but you had your chance. You wanted to protect local pharma against generics. They’re protected.
Healthcare is full of artificially induced shortages in America, and Americans pay for that every day with their lives. Now, that’s just slightly more obvious.
We ran a 100-petabyte cluster with all Meltdown/Spectre mitigation turned off because there was no foreign code running on it that didn't have access to the data itself.
It's all about the threat model. Engineers at the company were considered trusted actors and they were the only ones permitted to connect. If that layer failed, there is no way cache invalidation errors would be the fastest way in.
Completeness in the "full" reals is a useless feature, though. All is gives you is an emotional crutch to pretend your cauchy sequences can be mapped to regular numbers. But it doesn't give you anything you didn't already have in the cauchy sequences and useful reals.
You are of course right, reals are isomorphic to equivalence classes of Cauchy sequences on Q. But once you are dealing with equivalence classes of Cauchy sequences on Q you might as well give it a name. Maybe call it R.
His point is different. You cannot (by definition) ever write a "name", a formula, a rule, a lim expression, anything really, for a real that is not in the useful reals.
The reason I say that it is not healthy is that it is full of misinformation and sensationalism. I get upset at reading things I know are lies or errors perpetuated through confident ignorance and end up attempting to even it out by sensationalizing the other side (and perhaps in my anger doing some of the things that annoy me). I've noticed this weird behaviour in my parents arguing with their friends about politics and for the most part I'd removed myself from that but HN brings it forth.
What is valuable about HN is that you get some real experts talking about stuff they know well and startup entrepreneurs engage here in a way that's often closer than just posting on ProductHunt, and I like talking to other people like that.
Actually, thank you for asking this question, I think it's pretty obvious at this point that I should just stop using this website. But I needed the question to be asked. Should just use that time building and spend it on my private groups.