haZard_OS

I hate to be a naysayer here (because I actually like the idea of this calculator) but I use R for virtually every mathematical and statistical problem I encounter. It's always open on my computer while I'm working and I'm comfortable enough with the program that most of the syntax requires little thought on my part.

If I'm in the field and need to perform some calculations, I either use my phone (for simple calculations) or my $17 Casio statistics calculator.

As a risk assessor and environmental scientist, I have NEVER needed anything more than these.

On a number of occasions I have had prospective employers ask what my final grade was for specific classes. I have never been asked about my GPA specifically, but my grades at the University certainly affected me beyond academia.

>People do the calculus to decide if risk is greater than reward all the time.

Technically you're right but what you seem to be missing is that people (in general) suck at risk assessment. Although they are doing "the calculus", most of their calculations are based on heuristics that just don't reflect a rational analysis.

That is why so many people fear plane travel more than car travel, immigrants more than cigarettes, and pharmaceuticals more than "raw water".

As a statistician, that has not been my experience.

I agree with your point but I suspect the problem with statements like the one you identified is that they claim too much.

In other words, if I say "The American people want X", there are surely some Americans who don't want X and I just alienated them. If, however, I say "many Americans want X", I'm making a weaker claim that is easier to defend.

In general, I prefer that people err on the side of making a weaker claim. It's less frustrating to communicate with people willing to do so (for me, at least).

The one downside of criticizing "weasel words" is that more people start making overly broad claims that you and I do not care for.

I urge you to read Spinoza for yourself if you are under the impression that his philosophy is like Ayn Rand's. I assure you, they are worlds apart.

I never turn location services on and I run on mobile data (rather than WiFi) almost every moment of the day.

My location was correctly determined within the specified range. sigh Ridiculous.

>I have a pet theory that more visual thinking is something that has come in from our Neanderthal ancestors.

That is an interesting proposal. One thing I like about it is its easy testibility. Given how easy it is to find people without Neanderthal DNA, the effort needed to conduct a study on this question would be minimal.

More accidents happen at home for the same reason more car accidents happen close to home...that's where the people are often spending time.

Would you say that you haven't seen any proof that there are "inevitable" effects of (attempts at) communism?

An issue generated by the prospect of teachers carrying firearms is the problem of weapon retention.

Anyone trained with weaponry should understand that, when you are carrying, part of your attention must be on the weapon at all times. The way you stand, sit, walk, and interact with others must take into account good weapon retention practices.

Carrying a firearm is a bad idea for teachers because a teacher's focus should be on pedagogy, not on positioning oneself so that a student doesn't have easy access to your firearm.

I have two laptops for work, one of which is a System76 and both are currently running POP! OS (made by System76). I have had a few hiccups with the OS but nothing major.

I would say that I am very satisfied with S76. The 2 times I have had to contact them during the last 16 months or so have been good experiences, as well.

Douglas Walton has been my go-to on these topics for years. For those interested in a more professional presentation of some of the concepts used in this blog post, try this:

http://www.dougwalton.ca/papers.htm

For the record, our ability to link individual weather events to climate change is not zero. In the last 3 years or so we have become pretty good at it.

https://www.nap.edu/catalog/21852/attribution-of-extreme-wea...

Correction: There is no NECESSARY evolutionary pressure for the triplets to be the same.

Even Zeno knew the arrow would arrive at the other end of the room. The real question was what was creating the (apparent) paradox.

A little philosophy will get you in trouble. Just like martial arts or programming.

>The slippery slope fallacy isn't really a fallacy.

I'm going to be just a little pedantic here and point out that the Slippery Slope fallacy is indeed always a fallacy, it's just that not every argument based on a so-called slippery slope is a fallacy.

The fallacy is in the failure to demonstrate that the "first step" leads inexorably to the "final step" which is, of course, portrayed as a step people generally wish to avoid.

If one can demonstrate a plausible line of reasoning connecting the first step to the last step, no Slippery Slope fallacy has been committed.

I worked on a similar system when I was finishing my degree. I suspect that, in the next 5-10 years, there will be several versions of this of various sizes ready for deployment.

>For starters, he says, researchers should conduct "ablation studies" like those done with the translation algorithm: deleting parts of an algorithm one at a time to see the function of each component. He calls for "sliced analysis," in which an algorithm's performance is analyzed in detail to see how improvement in some areas might have a cost elsewhere.

...wait a minute. ML researchers don't already do this?!

Forgive me if I come across as arrogant or naive; I am a scientist but not in the ML field. I just can't fathom ANY field of research in which this very basic approach isn't followed.

I read Magee's book Confessions of a Philosopher some years ago and it was agonizing. Magee's personal bitterness was so pungent and so awkwardly colored his thoughts on philosophical topics that I found myself struggling to finish the book.

Of all the books on philosophy I have read, that book by Magee was easily the most off-putting.

I'm interested in the concept but do you have a suggestion for a book published more recently? "Do Elections Matter?" was published almost 30 years ago.

Gettier cases long ago convinced me that it is useless to talk about 'truth' apart from 'justification'.

Obviously, none of us can ascertain truth directly. The only way we can claim A or B is true is by appealing to some justification for our belief. Therefore, the idea that [knowledge = true and justified belief] collapses to [knowledge = justified belief].

From that point, we have only to discuss what constitutes better/worse justification(s).

Apparently, the hacker who posted this to HN is so good, he/she hacked into the future to bring it here.

Cue the HackerMan intro: https://youtu.be/KEkrWRHCDQU

I think this is a good time to introduce Richard Wolff, my favorite economist. Here, Wolff makes a few general remarks about Amazon in comparison to outsourcing to China:

https://www.rdwolff.com/is_amazon_the_1_threat_to_jobs

>When that expires, Steamboat Willie can be given away, sold, remixed, turned pornographic, or anything else.

Rule 34 indeed. I honestly wonder, in this age of memes and YouTube, if we will see a sudden spasm of creative remixing of the newly open content. Think of the movie Kung Pow but with much more 4Chan-like variety.

shudder

>I wonder why he's so afraid of people clearing his tracking pixels

Are you being sarcastic? I can think of several reasons Zuck wouldn't want people clearing their cookies. The primary one being the loss (even though temporary) of data resolution for targeting ads.

groan I actually had to address that claim during a lecture once. Ridiculous.

For the record, I think anyone peddling pseudoscience regarding medical conditions should be shutdown hard and fast. People who suffer from chronic pain or incurable illness can become desperate and turn to charlatans whose snake-oil can produce terrible effects. It isn't harmless to prey on such insecurities.

http://whatstheharm.net/