pull down to refresh
One thing I like to annoy economists with: "You don't contribute anything to society "Economics is remarkably good at explaining why what just happened was inevitable."
guilty as charged ;)
I really enjoy the spirit of this idea, especially the connection to random numbers that seem random but aren't. Another example is when people are asked to pick a random number from 1 to 100, 37 comes up more often than it should. 37 has the quality of "randomness" to the human mind where numbers like 1, 50, and 100 do not, despite all being equally likely.
I wonder if there is a more direct way of exploiting this besides the stock market.
In the stock market, the issue is that the LLM bias may be swamped by too many other factors for it to consistently make a profit. Even if it was consistently profitable, once the strategy catches on, shares known to be underpriced by LLMs will get bid up, and shares known to be overpriced will get sold down, to the point where the excess gains disappear.
One thing I like to annoy physicists with is: "Econ is harder than physics, because in physics the behavior of the objects you model doesn't depend on your model of the objects' behavior."
Well now that they posted a poll, I think i'd have to follow the poll coz it's shittier to ask people for their opinions only to not follow them.
If it didn't have the poll, I'd probably continue to list them but put a huge asterisk / warning sign on the product page.
Heresy alert: US college sports is a joke anyway, might as well let the clown show reach its natural clownish conclusion
How do we know that on average it will always be cheaper to trade rather than conquer?All of human history, basic logic, economics writing for the last four centuries etc etc.
Um... is that really true? Human history seems to suggest conquest is often the more efficient means of getting resources than trade. Sometimes, conquest is done for the specific purpose of opening up trade.
Having never been in such a situation (and Lord willing, never will be), I do find the psychology of it quite fascinating. Because it reminds me a lot of fallen pastors, which me being plugged into the Christian community I've heard lots of stories of. They lay low for a while. They usually don't address the issue publicly. But a few years later you often see them pastoring at another church somewhere, and everyone who they hurt in their original church is wondering how they could be so shameless.
Reason I'm bringing it up is because I wonder why I have one reaction when i watch law and order, and another reaction when i see this headline.
Perhaps it's because I don't trust ICE's motives? If they were targeting a single criminal, then I'd be more open to it than if they were trying to identify protestors, for example.
Or perhaps it's the size of the net they're casting? "Every person who bought a green beanie in the greater minneapolis area for 2 years" is a lot wider than a single store in the 90s, as you said.
It's sort of a tragic pattern in life where someone falls from grace in their profession, but despite all the fallout, you find them continuing on in that profession. Their reputation is bruised, but they just keep doing what they've always done, just with lower prominence (and perhaps with unsuspecting customers).
See this a lot with fallen pastors for example, or CEOs rocked by scandal that find their way to some other company.
I think it's because they've spent their life doing one thing, it's all they know how to do. Starting over in a new profession / industry doesn't make sense to them.
Do you agree with how Israel has handled Gaza post October 7? Or do you think some things could have been done better?
What makes this most noteworthy is that the college premium has declined just as the supply of college graduates began to level off in both countries. Typically, we would expect a supply slowdown to put upward pressure on prices (wage premiums) but here we see the opposite.
I mean, the causality can run both ways, soooo....
Moreover, there's a natural limit to the % of people you can grant degrees to and still have the degree actually mean anything
I try to put themselves in their shoes, supposing it was an honest mistake and not a retirement attack.
I don't think I'd pause development. If anything, I'd work extra hard to make sure the development process is better.
I'd probably be way more apologetic and communicative about the issue than they have been though. I wouldn't be blaming AI for it.
As for blocking people on Twitter, i'd probably just follow whatever my block policies were previously. If I used to block people for abusive language I'd still keep doing it.