prev <-> next
[2015-10-31 13:38:55] - si. ~a
[2015-10-30 19:33:30] - a: Y por que no? Sombreros son muy interesantes! - mig
[2015-10-30 18:20:50] - HA. i guess we don't talk about sombreros here very often. ~a
[2015-10-30 18:02:09] - New word: sombrero! - mig
[2015-10-30 18:00:02] - http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/10/29/college-presidents-sombrero-photo-sparks-outcry-apology/74848118/ does my ethnicity allow me to say if you took offense at this, there's something serioulsly fucking wrong with you? - mig
[2015-10-30 14:00:12] - HA, i've added it to my calendar. from my experience, the only linux harder to install than arch was gentoo. ~a
[2015-10-30 13:52:24] - https://www.twitchinstalls.com/ remember how chaotic twitch plays pokemon was? now we have a much harder challenge: install arch linux. every ten seconds, the most popular keystroke in twitch chat will be entered into an arch linux virtual machine - aaron
[2015-10-29 16:24:16] - hmmm, this makes me wonder if wiktionary maybe isn't the best place to look for real words. ~a
[2015-10-29 14:55:51] - paul: freethinker, n.: the feel of a kiss. ~a
[2015-10-29 14:20:18] - a: Depends on what the definition of free thinking is.
-Paul[2015-10-29 13:53:55] - paul: are you a freethinker? ~a
[2015-10-29 13:42:26] - I also jaywalk at many opportunities. Now I will try to do it even more often when I'm with Paul. -Daniel
[2015-10-29 13:39:17] - a: Okay, I guess by your definition I am proud, then.
I don't know if I like to be different, but I do like to think things through myself and not just accept the way things are. -Paul[2015-10-29 13:31:36] - "others are in the wrong and I am in the right" that's almost the definition of pride i think. everybody is wrong, and you are right? what's more, you're in the minority and you're in the right? that should evoke even more pride. you like to be different. ~a
[2015-10-29 13:22:52] - a: Um... I don't think so? I guess I do feel like others are in the wrong and I am in the right, but I also acknowledge I'm in the minority.
-Paul[2015-10-29 13:20:32] - "I also try to avoid jaywalking whenever possible." does this make you feel proud? ~a
[2015-10-29 13:18:43] - a: I don't feel as strongly that it's a bullshit crime as you (probably), but I do think it's silly. I also try to avoid jaywalking whenever possible. It does get a little awkward, though, when you're standing at the corner waiting patiently as dozens of people walk past you. -Paul
[2015-10-29 13:16:31] - ah, that's possible too. for context, i jaywalk like crazy all the time. jaywalking is a bullshit crime. ~a
[2015-10-29 13:16:09] - a: And my argument was that I (generally) don't run red lights even when the coast is obviously clear and I also didn't want to get a ticket. -Paul
[2015-10-29 13:15:38] - a: Hmmm, I was more thinking a time when I was with a group of people that kept jaywalking and I didn't and people got annoyed at me for not jaywalking. -Paul
[2015-10-29 13:11:06] - but you also had a "debate" (if you want to call it that) with dee about jaywalking when she said that she (once) gave out a ticket for jaywalking. ~a
[2015-10-29 13:08:58] - also that pedestrians/bikers/motorcycles should get more rights in the road. ~a
[2015-10-29 13:08:30] - haha, yes, you had a debate about jaywalking before. it was just now. i was arguing that jaywalking was a dumb offense, because of that "adam ruins everything" video. ~a
[2015-10-29 12:45:18] - I feel like I've had debates with people about jaywalking before, so I figure I would say it here: Apparently there is a cop handing out jaywalking tickets right in front of my work's building today. -Paul
[2015-10-29 12:19:09] - http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-10/29/miitomo-nintendo-first-smartphone-game nintendo's first mobile game is ... some weird Mii communication thing. I'm not sure it's even a game based on the details. - mig
[2015-10-29 12:11:26] - paul: indeed. - mig
[2015-10-29 11:59:09] - mig: Or Dusty Baker. -Paul
[2015-10-29 11:05:09] - http://mlb.nbcsports.com/2015/10/28/nationals-to-hire-bud-black-as-manager/ looks like it's Bud Black. I'm disappointed they didn't at least try to make a run at getting Mattingly but it looks like maybe he preferred the Marlins. But it could've been worse. They could have went for Ripken. - mig
[2015-10-29 08:51:17] - ok, wow, apparently he worked at reddit for a few years. ~a
[2015-10-28 15:03:41] - haha. git log |grep Author: |sort |uniq -c |sort -nr |head . . . one of the top results is "Logan Hanks". my git repo has a subtree that has reddit in it and apparently that's something logan has worked a bunch on? maybe he was an employee of reddit at some point? i'm not sure. ~a
[2015-10-28 14:33:40] - I'll go with a complete surprise and say it's a Zelda game. -Paul
[2015-10-28 14:31:51] - aaron: wario ware or mario party I'd wager. Maybe Mario Kart. Definitely not any sort of adventure type game. - mig
[2015-10-28 12:09:22] - http://www.cultofandroid.com/76962/nintendos-first-smartphone-game-will-be-revealed-tomorrow/ nintendo's first smartphone game will be revealed tomorrow... any guesses? i think something like WarioWare Touched would be the easiest to transition to a smart phone, but it'll probably be something ambitious like a new Luigi's Mansion - aaron
[2015-10-28 11:59:17] - and also, I grealy quibble with the notion that using the roads is "free". The gas comsumption required to drive sure isn't (and the taxes paid when buying gas go towards road maintainence). - mig
[2015-10-28 11:55:25] - and isn't the headline of the article (more roads -> worse traffic) contradicted by the conclusion of the article (more roads -> traffic stays about the same)? - mig
[2015-10-28 11:22:36] - a: Also, frankly, the article seemed to indicate that added public transit doesn't help the situation at all either, so it doesn't sound like this is at all an argument for bike lanes. The ultimate conclusion I drew was: "Is the solution then to privatize all roads?" Yes.
-Paul[2015-10-28 11:19:48] - a: The paragraphs with the line, "As it turns out, we humans love moving around." touches on this. People want to have more freedom to drive around now, but are being restricted. More roads removes some of these restrictions and would theoretically make people happier. -Paul
[2015-10-28 11:17:46] - a: That doesn't mean we just throw up our hands and say that there's no point in making bigger hard drives. People aren't just driving on roads to fill them up. If the roads are getting filled to capacity when they're built, doesn't that indicate a pent up demand? -Paul
[2015-10-28 11:16:37] - a: I didn't read the entire article, but I dispute your conclusion based on it. Even if adding car lanes doesn't make traffic any better, that doesn't mean it won't improve people's lives. Developing larger hard drives doesn't usually solve problems with running out of storage because files keep getting bigger. -Paul
[2015-10-28 11:01:21] - paul: "I'm completely fine with making more bike lanes once bike traffic gets worse than car traffic" see, here is where you take one step back. according to aaron's link, making car lanes doesn't help. adding bike lanes does help. do you disagree? ~a
[2015-10-28 10:51:37] - aaron: And I don't know of any public transit which will take less time than driving. When somebody provides me a better method of getting into work, I'll totally consider it. I'm not married to driving at all. I'm only promoting more roads because it seems like the easiest way to help the most people. -Paul
[2015-10-28 10:47:53] - a: It's against bike lanes in the same way that saying, "I prefer pizza to hamburgers" is against hamburgers. I can't be in favor of both but prefer one? I'm completely fine with making more bike lanes once bike traffic gets worse than car traffic. Right now, car traffic seems to be more of an issue. -Paul
[2015-10-28 10:46:50] - aaron: I believe that's totally possible, but I don't care how many bike lanes they make betwen Herndon and Alexandria, I don't think I'm going to be biking 2.5 hours (according to google maps) to work and then another 2.5 hours back. -Paul
[2015-10-28 10:23:30] - paul: but the counterintuitive conclusion being that if traffic's moving slower than 15 miles an hour, adding a bike lane does more to alleviate traffic than adding a new car lane. a car lane will just get filled up but a bike lane gives people an alternate choice other than driving - aaron
[2015-10-28 10:22:44] - i'm not sure i warped your position any. this doesn't seem to be against bike lanes? "if you have that much room for a bike lane, it's probably usually better served as a car lane" i strongly disagree with this statement both as a policy position and from a geometric viewpoint. ~a
[2015-10-28 10:22:10] - paul: the conjecture i heard somewhere is something like, "the amount of time it takes to drive between two points is directly proportional correlates to the amount of time it takes to travel via public transit", i thought it might have a catchy name like the "williams conjecture" or something that i could google but i can't find it - aaron
[2015-10-28 10:20:40] - paul: sorry, when i say "decrease traffic" i guess i mean -- right now it takes like 45 minutes to drive into DC, and if they added 10 new lanes on 66, it would still take 45 minutes to drive into DC -- because people's traffic patterns would alter, more people would take more jobs in DC, or eat lunch in DC, stop taking metro - aaron
[2015-10-28 10:19:08] - paul: i've heard that adding more lanes actually makes traffic worse, and the only way to decrease traffic is to increase alternate modes of traffic (e.g metro, bike lanes) - aaron
[2015-10-27 21:36:29] - a: I think even cities could use more car lanes instead of bike lanes. -Paul
[2015-10-27 21:36:03] - a: I feel like my position has been warped some. I'm not saying I'm against bike lanes, just that I think we are in more urgent need of more car lanes instead. I see massive (car) traffic jams every day. I don't recall ever seeing a big bike traffic jam. -Paul
[2015-10-27 17:48:45] - i don't want bike lanes everywhere, paul. and i obviously don't put much faith in magic, but you knew that. bike ridership is up. and i think that's thanks to more bike lanes. adding bike lanes as ridership continues to climb seems reasonable to me. if adding more bike lanes does not beget more riders, then maybe that's a good place to stop. ~a
[2015-10-27 17:45:29] - ok, you can talk about fairfax county if you want and i'll talk about alexandria, arlington, and dc. since those are usually the places i'm biking. i bike in fairfax county too, of course, but it's usually off-road. i find fairfax county doesn't have very many bike lanes on their roads by comparison. ~a
[2015-10-27 17:26:42] - a: I'm not talking about a city. I'm talking about Fairfax County. You can't reasonably replace driving with biking in a non-city environment. -Paul
[2015-10-27 17:25:45] - a: I'm not sure what your point is. Are you trying to say that if we had bike lanes everywhere that magically significant numbers of people would decide to bike hours to work instead of driving there in a fraction of the time? -Paul
[2015-10-27 17:18:55] - if you engineer a city with lots of bike lanes, lots of bikers bike to work. regardless, i'm guessing you haven't seen the use of dc's bike lanes recently. they're seriously packed with people. ~a
[2015-10-27 17:17:39] - a: Based on the fact that in this area we have some pretty bad car traffic and the vast majority of people commute via car (as opposed to bike). -Paul
[2015-10-27 17:16:09] - "Once a fifth or quarter of people start biking regularly to work" most city planners know something that apparently you do not: engineering a city decides behavior instead of the other way around. if i engineer a city with (literally) no sidewalks and no crosswalks, you've built LA, and what a surprise, 100% of the people drive everywhere. ~a
[2015-10-27 17:11:00] - what's more, you're assuming you can fit (say) two car lanes in the same space as one bike lane and one car lane? that seems like a preposterous scenario. bike lanes are generally 1/5th the width (or smaller). ~a
[2015-10-27 17:08:11] - paul: "better served as a car lane" how do you decide this? ~a
[2015-10-27 16:43:21] - daniel: http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/27/koch-brothers-to-appear-on-msnbcs-morning-joe/ -paul
[2015-10-27 16:30:44] - a: Like Daniel was saying, I think in most cases (at least in the Northern Virginia area that I live in) we need more car lanes more than we need more bike lanes. Once a fifth or quarter of people start biking regularly to work, then we can consider a dedicated bike lane on Fairfax County Parkway (which we kind of already have along some of it). -Paul
[2015-10-27 16:29:03] - a: I'm not necessarily dismissing it, I'm just saying I don't think things would be much different. I can't recall ever running into a situation where I felt like a crosswalk was urgently needed. Wide bike lanes on roads is a problem, but I think that's because if you have that much room for a bike lane, it's probably usually better served as a car lane. -Paul
[2015-10-27 16:20:06] - daniel: bikes have changed a lot over the years. horses, mostly, have not. what with the stupidly slow evolution and all. ~a
[2015-10-27 16:19:08] - daniel: i'm not arguing people's desire to drive. i'm arguing pedestrian rights in the roadways. something that at one point (even after cars were everywhere) was questioned. ~a
[2015-10-27 16:18:06] - I have no idea if horses and bikes were actual choices that people could choose between ever. It seems like they should be but I'm not looking up the date that bikes were invented or anything. So hopefully that comment is valid. -Daniel
[2015-10-27 16:17:13] - I think I would be fine saying that people's desire to drive is negligibly impacted by anything the auto industry did. I think the overwhelming majority of people would pick cars over bikes. People picked horses over bikes. We like the option where something else does the work for us. -Daniel
[2015-10-27 16:11:20] - paul: understood. i expected you to disagree. i don't think the majority of people drive because of some vast automotive industry conspiracy either, though. i'm not dumb. but to dismiss the (actual) conspiracy as having a contributory effect is also dumb. ~a
[2015-10-27 16:09:04] - daniel: that is your perspective. i have my own. ~a
[2015-10-27 15:30:48] - a: I mostly disagree. I don't think the majority of people prefer to drive vs bike/walk because of some vast automotive industry conspiracy. I think they do it because it's more convenient. -Paul
[2015-10-27 15:28:44] - a: " fewer lanes for cars" What?! No way, I think everyone is always wanting more lanes not less. Why would we have less lanes? -Daniel
[2015-10-27 14:49:02] - paul: because, usually, they don't have a wide enough lane for a car to pass me, where both i'm comfortable, and the car is comfortable. the bigger the difference in our speeds, the wider the area needs to be. (lines in the road denoting where the cars are supposed to be usually negates this need, but they're still not on all of the roads yet). ~a
[2015-10-27 14:47:15] - paul: there are also *lots* of roads (most roads actually) i feel uncomfortable biking on. ~a
[2015-10-27 14:45:54] - paul: there are many places where pedestrians don't get cross lights. tons of times i've been stuck on foot without a direct way to get from point A to point B without being in a car. ~a
[2015-10-27 14:44:49] - paul: fewer lanes for cars. more "lanes" (wider area) for pedestrians. more lanes for bycyclists. hell, i wonder (to myself mostly) if a lane for motorcyclists/scooters wouldn't make sense in some countries where cars are the minority. ~a
[2015-10-27 14:23:34] - a: Fair enough. How would roads be more pedestrian friendly, though? As a driver, I already feel like roads are too pedestrian friendly.
-Paul[2015-10-27 13:41:29] - why the tsa doesn't stop terrorist attacks, how to beat a lie detector test, why tipping should be banned, there are lots of others. ~a
[2015-10-27 13:36:51] - i posit that if the auto industry had done nothing, roads today would be more pedestrian friendly. ~a
[2015-10-27 13:36:48] - paul: i agree and i disagree. i agree with "getting pedestrians off roads was going to be necessary". i disagree with "I don't know if things would've been different if the auto industry had done nothing". you've set up a false dichotomy. getting people off the roads could be done in many ways. ~a
[2015-10-27 13:23:59] - a: Interesting video, although I don't know if things would've been different if the auto industry had done nothing. Cars seem like a fairly inevitable future, so it seems like getting pedestrians off roads was going to be necessary. -Paul
[2015-10-27 13:09:33] - paul: why jaywalking is a crime. 3 minutes long and requires audio. watch it after work if you don't have headphones. . . . made me think of our conversation a few weeks ago. as a note, this dude has like a million of these videos and they're all great (it's on actual tv i think). ~a
[2015-10-26 14:33:00] - paul: sure, like I said, it's sort of a deal, but on the whole I don't think this would be a make or break thing for Rubio. - mig
[2015-10-26 14:21:36] - mig: I guess. Just seems like a hard thing to spin. "I am missing votes because being a senator sucks. But voting on legislation is still important. I'm not quitting, just running for something better." I guess I can see it flying, but it's a hard sell for me. -Paul
[2015-10-26 13:48:07] - paul: sure, that seems like a fair point, though you can take it as a "frustrated with gridlock" thing. After all, the source of that ire is the "obstructionist" democrats, at least from his perspective. - mig
[2015-10-26 13:39:59] - a: That's kind of my point. If you can't stand being senator, I don't see how being president is going to be much better. I guess you do have a little more unilateral power, but it's still a LOT of wrangling with congress. -Paul
[2015-10-26 13:34:31] - paul: i'd vote for somebody who couldn't stand being a senator. that job sounds horrible. on the other hand, being president is probably a horrible job too. ~a
[2015-10-26 13:23:34] - mig: It's not even so much the missing of votes, but his whole attitude around apparently hating being a senator. It's hard to tell what is "official" and what is just rumor from anonymous sources, but if it becomes common knowledge, do people really want to vote for somebody who can't even stand being a senator? -Paul
[2015-10-26 13:19:12] - paul: maybe, but when you consider Obama's vote absences when he was running for president, I just don't see it as a big deal. Although it doesn't look good compared to someone like Rand Paul (who apparently rarely misses votes) or Ted Cruz. - mig
[2015-10-26 13:07:45] - The ideological rigidity thing is something I thought was interesting too. It just seems like there's more of a possibilit to find conservative people that are perhaps open to accepting the ideas of gay marriage, immigration, and abortion, while I'd be hard pressed to find progressives who are open towards free market based policies. - mig
[2015-10-26 13:04:44] - daniel: It's kind of strange though, to see Democrats kind of dismiss any electoral losses to "DEY CHEATED!" (gerrymandering or voter suppression) or complaining about dumb voters voting against their own interests, the latter of which is ironic in light of the backlash of Trump bashing the intelligence of Iowa voters who preferred Ben Carson. - mig
[2015-10-26 12:31:45] - mig: It feels like we've been shielded a bit by that country-wide change (Republicans taking over state governments) because in my lifetime, we've seen Virginia go from solidly Republican (governor and both senators) to fairly Democrat (governor and both senators). -Paul
[2015-10-26 12:30:26] - mig: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2015/10/25/28cfaff0-6d59-11e5-9bfe-e59f5e244f92_story.html I think this kind of thing could really hurt Rubio, were he to ever become the front-runner. It's part of the reason I have a hard time seeing him win the nomination. -Paul
[2015-10-26 12:29:39] - mig: I'd agree with most of that. It would be nice to see more ideas on how to win back various state governments by D's but I think that will be a tough battle. -Daniel
[2015-10-26 11:46:17] - http://www.vox.com/2015/10/19/9565119/democrats-in-deep-trouble i thought this was a pretty interesting analysis on the state of the democratic party. As much as the internal strife in the GOP makes headlines, this seems to be more of a significant problem if we're talking about the health of each party. - mig
[2015-10-26 10:36:23] - aaron: wow, yeah, simpson's paradox looks like almost exactly the same situation as the girl/boy thing. i.e. i think it's just comparing apples and oranges (percentages of two groups). if you have a small stone, looking at the success rates of all stones could be useless to you. if you're type-1 diabetic, looking at type 1+2 studies . . . same problem. ~a
[2015-10-26 10:17:30] - re: koch - "I was surprised at how reasonable and smart he sounded." Funny isn't it? It's almost as if all the media commentary about the Kochs being the great white satans hellbent on destroying 'murica were just a little exaggerated. - mig
[2015-10-26 10:08:30] - aaron: I saw that one explained pretty well on Reddit recently actually! -Daniel
[2015-10-26 09:44:49] - a: speaking of unintuitive statistics problems, did you ever look into Simpson's Paradox? Where treatment A is 6% more effective for one group, 4% more effective for the second group, but treatment B is more effective for both groups.... - aaron
[2015-10-25 13:08:44] - aaron: i figured the exact answer for two families. %girls = sum(1/(4**(j+1)) * ( j/(j+1) + 2*sum((i + 2*j + 1)/(2**(i+1) * (i + 2*j + 3)) for i in range(infinity)) ) for j in range(infinity)) = ~38.6% which is the same answer as your monte carlo solution. ~a
[2015-10-23 16:25:49] - a: Sorry! If it helps, I don't find it very confusing at all, but I think that's because I don't fully understand the problem. I'm fine with that, though. Ignorance is bliss for me in this case. -Paul
[2015-10-23 15:50:01] - stupid paul. ~a
[2015-10-23 15:49:57] - god this is confusing. ~a
[2015-10-23 15:48:25] - sorry, ratio of girls to total. ~a
[2015-10-23 15:47:37] - aaron: to take the math further . . . expected number of boys: exactly 1, expected number of girls: exactly 1. expected ratio of girls to boys . . . 30.68%! hahaha, so non-intuitive. ~a
[2015-10-23 15:38:15] - a: wow good job mathing it out! that's cool my monte carlo solution came kind of close. - aaron
[2015-10-23 15:36:28] - paul: (oops, that's a three-family case. but in any case i sorted it out for myself. it's still confusing but at least i understand it a little. flashbacks to the monte carlo problem...) - aaron
[2015-10-23 15:35:15] - paul: it's because you're averaging ratios. for the one-family case, two zero-girl families and one 591-girl family averages out to ~33% girls (0.999/3). for the four-family case, two zero-girl families and one 591-girl family averages out to ~100% girls (591/593) - aaron
[2015-10-23 15:31:30] - aaron: sum for n = 0 to infinity: n / (2**(n+1) * (n+1)) . . . using python i got about the same answer as your monte carlo solution: ~30.68% ~a
[2015-10-23 15:30:59] - aaron: ok, i decided to give up on monte carlo and use math . . . the expected value for one family is not 50/50, you're absolutely right. ~a
[2015-10-23 15:30:44] - paul: hmm okay i'm glad to help, although i'm more confused than when i started now. how is the expected ratio of girls for one family so much less than the expected ratio of girls for ten families... what's the difference between simulating one family ten times and ten families once? ....OH OH okay i just got it. ha ha! that's cute - aaron
[2015-10-23 15:28:32] - aaron: Ok, good. That actually makes sense to me. Thanks! -Paul
[2015-10-23 15:21:00] - a: f=10000,t=1000 isn't enough trials for that family size. but yeah, if you go with like, 100 families and 1 trial, or 10,000 families and 10 trials or something like that -- you run a greater chance of seeing statistically anomalous data - aaron
[2015-10-23 15:19:02] - a: try f=1,t=10000 to see the expected value for females for one family, it's certainly not 50/50. i agree if nothing else it's a very unintuitive result - aaron
[2015-10-23 15:16:21] - aaron: i think the expected value for females is going to be exactly 50/50 for one family. ~a
[2015-10-23 15:15:12] - aaron: change f=10000,t=1000 . . . i'm still playing with your app, and i'm not sure i agree. ~a
[2015-10-23 15:14:06] - a: when i said "it is never exactly 50/50" i mean, the expected ratio of girls to boys is never exactly 50/50, it is just very very close. 49.99% or 49.9999% or 49.999999%. it is always less. - aaron
[2015-10-23 15:09:35] - a: if i just simulate a 1,000 family country once, it ends up with more girls about half the time. but if i simulate that country 10,000 times and average the cases (like you should with monte carlo) then it ends up with more girls maybe 1% of the time. very very very rarely. - aaron
[2015-10-23 15:07:34] - paul: yeah, it gets closer and closer as the country gets larger and larger, but it's always less than 50%. you could get more than 50% girls but it would be statistically anomalous - aaron
[2015-10-23 15:02:50] - a: int f=1000,t=10000;double r=0;for(int i=0;i<t;i++){double b=0,g=0;for(int j=0;j<f;j++){while(Math.random()<0.5)g++;b++;}r+=g/(b+g);}System.out.println(r/t); - aaron
[2015-10-23 15:02:26] - aaron: you don't ever get more than 50% girls? in my monte carlo, i sometimes get ~50.1% sometimes 49.9%. ~a
[2015-10-23 15:02:21] - aaron: "it is never exactly 50/50". never? literally never? isn't there a chance it'll be exactly 50/50? ~a
[2015-10-23 15:00:59] - aaron: So, in a country with a very large population, you would expect the ratio of boys to girls to be very close to 50/50, right? -Paul
[2015-10-23 15:00:15] - Daniel: And, frankly, it sounded like the interviewer was trying to "nail" him with some of those pointed political questions in the middle, so I don't think it's an issue of the right questions not being asked, although I do agree that there are probably a host of issues where you and him ultimately disagree. -paul
[2015-10-23 14:58:33] - 1 family: 31% girls 2 families: 39% girls 3 families: 42% girls 4 families: 44% girls 1,000 families: 49.96% girls - aaron
[2015-10-23 14:55:22] - Daniel: They they donate to the arts and to the United Negro college fund and such things. -Paul
[2015-10-23 14:54:39] - Daniel: I think most people think they're just hardcore Republicans (which they are not) and are huge crony capitalists who are trying to rig the system to benefit their business (again, I don't think that's true). Most people don't know their commitment to criminal justice reform or gay marriage or... -Paul
[2015-10-23 14:52:55] - Daniel: If I had to guess, I would say that you and the Koch brothers probably agree on roughly half of the "issues" (and I realize it's incredibly hard to define what the issues are). I think most people have a pretty inaccurate view of where they stand on a bunch of issues. -Paul
[2015-10-23 14:52:20] - a: i read all of his blog posts and agree with his conclusion that the odds approach 50/50 as the number of families increase, but it is never exactly 50/50. i can write a simulation for the n-family case and see if i can duplicate his findings - aaro
[2015-10-23 14:46:01] - But honestly I was surprised to hear him say we should care about taking care of the environment. Maybe that means I was expecting Satan and didn't find it. I mean I didn't have a high bar for him but still... -Daniel
[2015-10-23 14:36:39] - Paul: Like maybe if you pressed more for details on how his views reconcile taking care of the environment and his views on anti gov and how that shakes out maybe then there would be things we disagree on there. Or maybe asking specific questions about humans and climate change would illuminate differences. -Daniel
[2015-10-23 14:34:43] - Paul: I was surprised at how reasonable and smart he sounded. I'm not totally sure I agree with everything but I think in part I could understand or get behind a lot of his thoughts which surprised me. I'm not sure if its him being good at spin or just not quite the right questions being asked but from the interview I thought he came off well. -Daniel
[2015-10-23 14:02:28] - a: Yeah. I figured 16 families was enough to get me a good sense of what it should look like. I figured if I came up within 1 boy/girl of the other, it meant it was 50/50. -Paul
[2015-10-23 13:55:05] - paul: gotcha. that makes sense, actually. i wasn't sure if that's what you were doing or not. you did like an approximate solution . . . got you "close" to the right answer like my montecarlo solution did (the last family is just an "approximate" answer, since you had no good reason to say the last family had a boy after the 4 girls) ~a
[2015-10-23 13:17:28] - a: Does it not work like that?
-Paul[2015-10-23 13:16:58] - a: Hard to explain. I listed out 16 rows. The first 8 just had boys for the first child. The next 4 families had a girl then a boy. The next 2 had 2 girls and a boy. The next had 3 girls and a boy. The last had 4 girls and a boy. So I guess it was 15-16. So maybe it's a little off from 50/50? -Paul
[2015-10-23 13:12:12] - paul: how did you get even numbers with 16 families? families can be very big. using this scenario, my program simulated families that were as big as 26 children (25 girls and one boy), and obviously, there's no limit to how big a family can get. ~a
[2015-10-23 13:07:47] - a: Eh, I don't feel like a program is necessary. I just scribbled down how it should work out for 16 families with a 50/50 chance of boy/girl and got even numbers. Not sure why it would change with 16,000 families. -Paul
[2015-10-23 12:58:46] - Daniel: Curious what you think about it. I think I think more highly of the Kochs than most people here. None of that interview came across as particularly surprising to me and I didn't see anything I glaringly disagreed with. I'm wondering if you read that and were thinking, "This person is satan!".
-Paul[2015-10-23 12:45:39] - mine ~a
[2015-10-23 12:43:02] - paul: write a program! for me this is hard math, and i took combinatorics in college. ~a
[2015-10-23 12:40:51] - a: Those are the same assumptions I am making. Oddly enough, my first "gut-feeling" was that it wouldn't be 50/50. Then I thought I read in the article that it wasn't, and felt vindicated. Now I'm just confused. -Paul
[2015-10-23 12:32:07] - Interesting interview with Charles Koch - http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/corner-office/full-interview-charles-koch -Daniel
[2015-10-23 11:30:15] - paul: i'm only ok saying it's the output is 50/50 assuming the odds of girls and boys is exactly 50/50 and if we're doing this strictly mathematically: i.e. in practice, most women are unwilling to give birth to thousands of girls and one boy. ~a
[2015-10-23 11:08:05] - anyways, the writer of the article is wrong? or i'm wrong? where is aaron!
~a[2015-10-23 10:50:09] - a: Ok. Now I'm back on the 50/50 side. I am ALWAYS wrong when it comes to probability.
-Paul[2015-10-23 10:47:27] - a: Ugh, really? I thought the answer was that there will be about 30%... boys? Now I'm confusing myself. -Paul
[2015-10-23 10:42:05] - paul: well unless my program is wrong: it'll always be about the same. sometimes slightly more girls, sometimes slightly more boys. are we assuming exactly 50%? (i didn't read the whole thing) ~a
[2015-10-23 10:37:25] - a: This actually makes more sense to me than the Monte Hall thing.
-Paul[2015-10-23 10:37:11] - a: I was able to talk myself through the idea that there would be more boys than girls, but I still don't really understand their explanation. -Paul
[2015-10-23 10:33:56] - paul: i confused myself a couple times so i wrote a program to test it. ~a
[2015-10-23 06:26:50] - I mean, I get the idea that there would be more boys, but I don't understand all the talk about "the expected number of girls is equal to the expected number of boys". -Paul
[2015-10-23 06:14:03] - http://www.thebigquestions.com/2015/10/07/boys-girls-and-hot-hands/ Can anybody give me a really simple explanation as to what the real answer to this question is? -Paul
[2015-10-23 06:04:14] - a: Related: I keep meaning to buy some Alphabet stock, but I keep forgetting, and the share price keeps going up.
-Paul[2015-10-23 05:57:28] - a: Yes, but I think I have more exposure to that world than most people in the message board.
-Paul[2015-10-22 20:20:17] - have you guys heard of Alphabet Inc.? i understand it's just like . . . a corporate structuring thing, but i'm surprised that i hadn't heard of it by name. ~a
[2015-10-22 16:13:38] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/22/donald-trumps-numbers-slump-in-iowa-he-grumps/ for the anti-trumps, some glimmer of hope. - mig
[2015-10-22 15:00:59] - new potential nationals manager ... Don Mattingly. I like the idea. He's been maligned a lot in his time in LA by dodgers fans, but I remain perplexed as to why he gets so much criticism. - mig
[2015-10-22 10:13:13] - mig: yeah i saw that. i'm surprised, though, that sanders said he wouldn't pardon snowden. ~a
[2015-10-22 09:45:15] - Sanders is on the record saying Snowden should face prosecution (and that he would not pardon Snowden). I wonder if he has the same opinion of James Clapper. - mig
[2015-10-21 19:48:18] - a: quick correction, that's not sanders on snowden but him basically linking to an article that I assume sums up his feelings on snowden. possibly. - mig
[2015-10-21 17:09:04] - also, of note, biden has dropped out (opted out really). ~a
[2015-10-21 17:08:21] - daniel/aaron: thinking out loud: sanders on edward snowden vs clinton on edward snowden. hmmmmm . . . mmmm . . . mmm. ~a
[2015-10-21 13:28:49] - (discussion taken out of band) ~a
[2015-10-21 13:10:06] - a: which is the most intuitive? ~g
[2015-10-21 12:38:03] - mig/g: i've used gandi, i've used namecheap, i've used noip, and i've used godaddy. all of them let you have full-control of your domain, even if it's not always obvious how to set that up. all of them accept bits except godaddy. gandi and godaddy are more expensive. ~a
[2015-10-21 11:45:32] - i don't know if their rates have changed, but gandi was typically around $15ish/yr for domain registration if that's all you're looking for. - mig
[2015-10-21 11:18:11] - mig: I am using a different source for building/hosting. However I worry about being locked into them if I use their site to register it. ~g
[2015-10-21 10:55:38] - g: do you require only to register domain by itself or do you need other things (web site builder, hosting, other kinds of support, etc)? - mig
[2015-10-21 10:44:55] - g: ~a i believe still uses gandi.net - mig
[2015-10-21 10:44:15] - xpovos: there's a new (vaporware but cool concept) called augur. it's like bitbet, but distributed. like bitcoin, there are no owners, there are no servers. they call it a "distributed prediction market" and it'll be pretty sweet IMO if it ever gets off the ground. ~a
[2015-10-21 10:34:14] - xpovos: i re-checked the faq, and the address stays live for 72 hours. so, now you've got at least 48 hours. anyways, it's just http://bitbet.us/ . there is *NO* enforcement. caveat emptor. ~a
[2015-10-21 10:28:54] - Hmm, that might be a worthwhile investment of my bits. But it's been more than an hour. I'm sure it'll come around again, but how on earth do you find these things? And how is there any kind of enforcement? -- Xpovos
[2015-10-21 10:15:08] - Who would you all suggest using for registering a domain name? ~g
[2015-10-20 17:12:27] - what? why not? i think xpovos has some bits you can borrow. ~a
[2015-10-20 16:52:23] - a: I don't have a bitcoin wallet (assuming that's what you're asking about). Thanks, though. -Paul
[2015-10-20 16:35:19] - paul: send money to 1KsmnSLA2gs6rGcUn2aYCu76sfmaG7TLLw (that address should work for the next hour. i'm also assuming you have a wallet that will accept bits back on the address sent from). you'll receive ~130% of any bits you send there, assuming he loses. ~a
[2015-10-20 16:24:57] - mig: I guess not. It kinda DOES seem like he's happily lingering in the shadows, biding his time while everybody scrambles to take down Trump.
-Paul[2015-10-20 16:20:06] - paul: I can't rule out Cruz at this point. - mig
[2015-10-20 16:17:35] - mig: I feel like at this point it has to be Rubio or Jeb. I'm not even sure who I would rank third behind them. Kasich? Christie? Jindal? -Paul
[2015-10-20 16:06:55] - I'm in agreement that the Trump thing is going to start to waffle once more candidates drop out. My money is still on Rubio. - mig
[2015-10-20 15:35:56] - a: I would totally bet money against Trump being the nominee if it were easy to do. Am I understanding what you're saying? They're giving him a 1/3 chance of being the nominee? -Paul
[2015-10-20 12:49:47] - mig: Heh, true, but we'll be trading off Webb's complaining about speaking time to Anderson Cooper for Biden's gaffes (and potential friction with Clinton over Obama's endorsement). I think it should at least even out. -Paul
[2015-10-20 12:43:06] - esepcially if Biden throws his hat into the ring. - mig
[2015-10-20 12:42:01] - paul: well yes but it means all the next democratic debates are going to be borderline unwatchable. - mig
[2015-10-20 12:35:53] - mig: There are rumors he might run as an independent, though. -Paul
[2015-10-20 11:57:10] - http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/webb-dropping-out-214952 well that's disappointing. - mig
[2015-10-20 11:43:02] - a: for a presidential election, once. I have voted in 2 VA governor's elections. - mig
[2015-10-20 11:25:30] - mig: have you ever voted in a general? ~a
[2015-10-20 10:32:11] - xpovos: not voting is always an option... - mig
[2015-10-19 19:03:43] - a: a serious guess? hmm hmm. maybe "Betrayal at House On The Hill..." it's basically the board game version of cabin in the woods! they could make a movie from it easy - aaron
[2015-10-19 18:03:39] - paul: 1206: currently at 3:1 against. you could make some serious cash if the odds are 5%. otoh, jeb is at about even odds and rubio is too, so i think voting against everybody winning is very likely a money-winning proposal. ~a
[2015-10-19 17:51:16] - aaron: HA. let's bet on the next board/card-game that becomes a movie. my bet is the settlers of catan. "if one of you dare to roll a 7, the robber will move to another land." ~a
[2015-10-19 16:13:26] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDpSwl-fJcU first "battleship" and now... "mafia"? well okay - aaron
[2015-10-19 14:14:29] - Xpovos: Trump being the Republican nominee wouldn't drive me to vote for Bernie (there are always third party options), but it would be frightening nonetheless. I still put Trump winning the nomination at less than 5%, though. -Paul
[2015-10-19 13:48:49] - Xpovos: I still think that once other people start dropping out that others will gain and not trump. I guess I could be wrong but I think the non trump supporters are less likely to become trump supporters once their 1st choice drops out. I mean Rubio supporters are going to Trump over Jeb (or vice versa)? I guess if no one ever drops out... -Daniel
[2015-10-19 12:28:05] - I think they found a way to make me vote for Bernie Sanders: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/425750/gop-establishment-thinks-trump-could-win -- Xpovos
[2015-10-17 08:34:47] - a: We have people from the previous time slot who are coming. -Paul
[2015-10-17 08:34:13] - a: No, we're on. Did you read your email? -Paul
[2015-10-16 17:28:31] - paul: i guess ultimate is canceled, right? i only see three yesses. ~a
[2015-10-16 12:03:43] - a: officially: THINK OF THE CHILDREN!. unofficially, it's difficult to actually account for all the monies, and most sites are outside US jurisdiction. Generally, if the government can't control it as much it'd like to, banning becomes the preferred option. - mig
[2015-10-16 11:44:38] - to say that betting on fantasy sports or betting on poker isn't gambling is moronic. but, online gambling being illegal also seems dumb to me: who (besides vegas) is hurt by online gambling? ~a
[2015-10-16 10:58:19] - xpovos: http://www.forbes.com/sites/darrenheitner/2015/10/15/nevada-closes-its-doors-on-daily-fantasy-sports/ so it begins. - mig
[2015-10-15 14:06:21] - TL:DR he's way too much "by the book" old school purist. - mig
[2015-10-15 14:04:10] - paul: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dusty_Baker#Criticism that's one part of it. I feel like a lot of his problems sort of echo the problems of Matt Williams. - mig
[2015-10-15 13:59:22] - Xpovos: I have no problem with his age, but I think Dusty has a reputation (although I admit I don't know how accurate it is) of over-using pitchers. -Paul
[2015-10-15 13:57:04] - mig: I love Dusty and think he's a fine manager. That said, I'm in agreement. I don't want to seem ageist, since an elderly manager can handle a club quite well, but Dusty is well past his prime. Nats need some newer blood. -- Xpovos
[2015-10-15 13:09:34] - Dusty Baker set to interview with the nationals. For the love of god, please pass on him. - mig
[2015-10-14 15:38:41] - paul: he's fortunate right now that the Democrats in Kentucky don't seem to have anyone credible to run against him (I had heard they were thinking of trotting out Allison Lunderman Grimes again but that apparently fizzled out), so he's safe unless the establishment want to try and primary against him. - mig
[2015-10-14 15:23:23] - mig: I want to see what kind of percentages he can garner after Trump/Fiorina/Carson are out. -Paul
[2015-10-14 15:22:50] - mig: I haven't followed that aspect of his campaign as much (I know he had to spend money to fund some caucus or whatnot). I hope he sticks around until the final three or so (like Ron Paul did when it came down to him, Romney and Santorum), but I could see him dropping out before then. I really hope he outlasts this Trump bubble, though. -Paul
[2015-10-14 12:43:03] - paul: the big issue with Paul right now is his senate seat. He's gone to great lengths (including some measure that make me uncomfortable from an ethics standpoint) to ensure he can run for both president and senate. If there's any inkling that his senate seat is in danger, I'm afraid he's going to drop off immediately to focus on that. - mig
[2015-10-13 21:26:12] - a: But I do think he has an underrated grass-roots support that'll help him end up being one of the last 3-5 candidates standing, and I still don't see an overwhelming favorite in the Republican race. -Paul
[2015-10-13 21:22:53] - a: I'll take your word for it since I can't understand what your page says. I actually haven't contributed to his campaign (yet?). Does that make you more of a Republican than me?
I'm torn on his campaign. It's certainly disappointing how poorly his polling numbers look right now... -Paul[2015-10-13 17:21:09] - paul: 8901ee68! i donated 39,000 bits to his campaign. i don't think the campaign is going very well, though. ~a
[2015-10-13 09:55:09] - https://randpaul.com/ If anybody cares, Rand Paul is apparently streaming his entire day today. Probably likely to be more boring than it sounds (and it already sounds fairly boring), but thought I would throw it out there. -Paul
[2015-10-09 13:54:45] - while DFS is certainly not "new" by any means, DFS being mainstream is still a rather recent development (yahoo just started its own DFS offerings this summer). - mig
[2015-10-09 13:51:47] - xpovos: maybe in a year from now and we still see the same sort of advertising blitz, then I might be inclined to agree. For now though, considering DK and FD are probably fiercely fighting for players, I don't see it as an issue at the moment. - mig
[2015-10-09 13:35:51] - 1) Because they're obscenely profitable and want to increase those profits. 2) Because they have a high churn rate and have reached market saturation with previous audiences. Profitability isn't inherently a bad thing, of course, but when a company is profitable to the extent that the best place to invest money is advertising, that is the problem. See: insurance. -- X
[2015-10-09 13:34:26] - I dunno about you, but I heard plenty of radio ads for it on sports radio, and saw ads for it online DFS was not new to me in 2015. I even participated in 2013. The TV ad blitz was what was new and problematic. They're aggressively looking to broaden their userbase. Why? -- Xpovos
[2015-10-09 13:33:35] - mig: Sure. Advertising does three things. It builds brand recognition. It persuades potential customers. It demonstrates a product. A new product needs more of that particularly from a new brand, so the fact that DFS were advertising wasn't itself a problem. -- Xpovos
[2015-10-09 12:58:15] - http://uproxx.com/gammasquad/2015/10/avengers-age-of-ultron-robert-california-the-office-mashup/ This gets old after a bit, but I found it amusing for a stretch. They basically take some of Robert California's lines (James Spader's character from The Office) and insert them into Age of Ultron. -Paul
[2015-10-09 12:44:15] - virtually no TV advertising (that I know of), so maybe there is something to that? - mig
[2015-10-09 12:43:56] - xpovos: " If you're advertising on television, and in this I mean A LOT, not just the occasional ad buy, there's something fundamentally wrong with your business." I don't know if I necessarily agree with that. Particularly when a business is relatively new, you probably want as much advertising as you can get. Though I suppose as a counterargument, Yahoo does ...
[2015-10-09 12:11:35] - mig: Indeed. I've become very cynical of late regarding advertising. If you're advertising on television, and in this I mean A LOT, not just the occasional ad buy, there's something fundamentally wrong with your business. I'm looking at automobile sales and insurance, and pharmaceuticals as big losers. When DFS ad blitzed like that, I knew it was all over. -- Xpovos
[2015-10-09 12:01:33] - xpovos: http://www.sportingnews.com/fantasy/nfl/story/2015-10-08/daily-fantasy-sports-dfs-gambling-addicition-regulation-lawsuit-industry-nfl i and here come the "victim" sob stories. Looks like the "DO SOMETHING" crowd is going to rev up the pressure to ruin DFS. - mig
[2015-10-09 11:44:36] - mig: satire? ~a
[2015-10-09 11:37:34] - mig: Either way, I enjoyed it. I probably like it even more because I can't tell which it is. -Paul
[2015-10-09 11:33:43] - paul: maybe less parody but more introspective criticism? - mig
[2015-10-09 11:23:16] - Daniel: Is it even "right" to say you prefer being served (because that's basically what it is) by minorities? And frankly, that last paragraph about monkeys just screams parody to me. -Paul
[2015-10-09 11:22:44] - Daniel: And that's totally what I thought at first, but there are some sentences that make me think that the author is almost poking fun at people who do that (maybe even poking fun at himself?). Do people really admit that they prefer going to places where non-whites are employed vs majority whites? -Paul
[2015-10-09 11:19:55] - Paul: I don't know that its a parody, I think for some they think a lot about how they vote with their wallet and this article seems to be pointing out that sometimes thats tricky. Something like that I think? -Daniel
[2015-10-09 11:12:10] - http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/11/nyregion/chick-fil-a-and-the-politics-of-eating.html?_r=0 I can't tell if article is a parody or not, but I enjoyed it nonetheless. -Paul
[2015-10-09 10:07:13] - http://arstechnica.com/cars/2015/10/elon-musk-if-you-dont-make-it-at-tesla-you-go-work-at-apple-im-not-kidding/#p3 The more I hear about Elon Musk, the more I like him.
-Paul[2015-10-09 09:55:20] - https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ%3AZINC&ei=R8YXVuGqEYi-e_aurOAG Until a few weeks ago, I owned this stock. My first reaction was that I really wished that I had held onto it (based on it being up 100%+ over the past 5 days), but then I realized I had sold it at a higher price than it's at now.
-Paul[2015-10-08 20:29:17] - https://github.com/nvbn/thefuck the fuck, a magnificent app which corrects your previous console command - aaron
[2015-10-08 16:31:14] - xpovos: http://theweek.com/articles/582127 may not really be that. McCarthy may have had a skeleton in his closet that might have become exposed. - mig
[2015-10-08 14:04:35] - Xpovos: That would be nice. I guess we're even seeing a form of it in the presidential primaries, with the top 3 people all being political outsiders. Still, I'm not holding my breath. -Paul
[2015-10-08 14:01:04] - Paul: Revolution. We might finally be seeing the party realignment that's been overdue. -- Xpovos
[2015-10-08 13:30:29] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/10/08/house-majority-leader-kevin-mccarthy-drops-out-of-race-for-house-speaker/ Hurray! But, wtf is going on with Republican congressional leadership? -Paul
[2015-10-08 13:25:26] - Daniel: It would be like if Dick Cheney came out and loudly demanded that we invade Iran because they have WMDs. Sure, maybe there are CIA reports to back him up right now, but he was pretty wrong before (despite having reports to back him up) so maybe he should be a little more humble this time. -Paul
[2015-10-08 13:24:42] - Short version (non-linked) is that a federal government initiative intended to bring healthier food to kids in school lunch programs has been hard to implement, particularly in some local jurisdictions, which has resulted in a substantial backlash. And in some cases, arguably less healthy food. -- Xpovos
[2015-10-08 13:24:11] - Daniel: And it seems like far too often the government is throwing around bans and restrictions and dictates about nutrition data that, while backed by the science of the time, ultimately has some flimsy backing (again, especially considering the dubious history). -Paul
[2015-10-08 13:22:25] - Daniel: I don't think it's a black or white thing where either the government has to dictate so specifically what kids are eating (no whole milk, in this example) or just serve kids anything (red bull, etc). The government can act on science, but I think the degree to which it acts should reflect the certainty of the scientific position. -Paul
[2015-10-08 13:21:59] - WaPo, mostly about the Twitter side. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2014/11/24/students-are-blaming-michelle-obama-for-their-gross-school-lunches/ WaTi on the decline in enrollment in the lunch programs, ostensibly due to the rules changes. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/6/1m-kids-stop-school-lunch-due-michelle-obamas-stan/?page=all -- X
[2015-10-08 13:18:56] - Daniel: Huh. OK, well let me find you a genuinely good source then... hang on. -- Xpovos
[2015-10-08 13:07:35] - Xpovos: I do not other than that article. -Daniel
[2015-10-08 11:10:51] - Daniel: Yeah, I just grabbed the first link off Google. That's not a good site. But certainly you know about the drama around the 'healthy' school lunch programs being pushed my Michelle Obama? -- Xpovos
[2015-10-08 11:06:55] - Xpovos: I'm not sure the point of the article. Kids don't like to eat healthy therefore we should give them back candy bars? Also the end was a little melodramatic. -Daniel
[2015-10-08 11:06:04] - Paul: Why are we offering only those though? Why isn't the school providing coke? Or Monster? Or Red Bull? My point is a bit hyperbole and we could draw the line to include whole and skim milk sure. But they have to draw a line somewhere and they way they do that is going to be based on what experts say. -Daniel
[2015-10-08 11:00:34] - Daniel: That's probably fine, but even that seems likely it can't succeed. http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/students-full-revolt-michelle-obamas-horrible-school-lunch/ -- Xpovos
[2015-10-08 10:59:30] - Daniel: Couldn't they offer a choice, though? Offer skim milk AND whole milk and let the parents/students decide which to drink? -Paul
prev <-> next