shasta

8 ms·

1.
by shasta 10y ago
Isn't that mostly because of the legal process? When a guy is accused of rape, he's the one on trial. Mentioning his drug use might be excluded as prejudicial, even though the jury might find it relevant.
2.
by shasta 10y ago
Of course it's not reasonable to conclude that he's telling the truth on the basis of her clothing. But my point is that it's also not reasonable to treat any mention of her clothing as off limits. It's just one piece
3.
by shasta 10y ago
Your claim is that P(consent | sexy clothes) = P(consent | not sexy clothes)? Seems counterintuitive. Do you have evidence to support this claim?
4.
by shasta 10y ago
Is there really a big problem with acceptable/legal behavior not being agreed upon? Isn't the problem usually that the guy claims "it was consensual?" Similarly, when police consider what a woman was wearing, isn'
5.
by shasta 10y ago
Is the analogy really that good? A pilot will never be called upon to engineer a plane. Lots of good "hackers" will get stuck if they have to design an algorithm.
6.
by shasta 10y ago
Well, what did it do when you tried?
7.
by shasta 10y ago
I think this is it. To be good at mathematics you need a considerable amount of time to sit and do mathematics. The only way someone is going to fund this as part of a job is if you're already a mathematician.
8.
by shasta 10y ago
Patent lawyer or no, you're still more qualified than the average participant. I'm not sure what criteria you're using to judge that the proposal would be worse for a less wealthy litigant. Surely the proposal would be bette
9.
by shasta 10y ago
Wow, a real patent lawyer in a patent law thread. You don't belong here, but I'll upvote whatever you have to write. I have a comment and a question: The comment. Summary judgement does not accomplish what I think sheepleherd wa
10.
by shasta 10y ago
> I agree that the UBI should be flat, because anything else is equivalent to changing our tax brackets; and if we want to do that, we should just change our tax brackets. This was such a dumb sentence in an otherwise interesting post.
11.
by shasta 10y ago
I got mine down to 0.31xxx. I did about a hundred strokes and it never went over 0.48.
12.
by shasta 10y ago
According to Google, the average human male foot is 26.3 cm, or 0.86 feet. So I suppose I am literally 7 feet fall.
13.
by shasta 10y ago
Simpler still: "the autopsy showed poison, so put the spouse in prison."
14.
by shasta 10y ago
This article seems to miss the role of theories in physical sciences. When we talk about 'cause' we understand that to mean that some chain of events, governed by the rules of physics, lead to the result. Yes, those rules of phy
15.
by shasta 10y ago
"On the eve of publication, Bertrand Russel wrote to Frege and pointed out that Frege's logical system allowed statements that were ambiguous -- neither false nor true." This makes it sound as though Russel showed the system
16.
by shasta 10y ago
Maybe this isn't enough data points, but I just tested this and the elephant with the human brain just lies there on the ground.
17.
by shasta 10y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newcomb%27s_paradox
18.
by shasta 10y ago
It's almost as if "number of lines" isn't particularly meaningful.
19.
by shasta 10y ago
That's impossible. Everyone here knows crunch mode doesn't work and you're most productive working 20 hours a week.
20.
by shasta 10y ago
From what I just read, it doesn't even sound that deep. If you ask me whether a good act was "intentional", I'd assume you mean whether the good effect was the purpose of the act. But if you ask whether a bad act was
21.
by shasta 11y ago
> The reason is quite simple. As inequality gets more pronounced, a larger fraction of the population faces more stringent budget constraints, and the spectrum of possible economic interactions open to them narrows. That's pretty si
22.
by shasta 11y ago
That's a pretty simplistic explanation. There are lots of ways to mess up Lisp in an attempt to enable the style of meta-programming that Kernel supports. What distinguishes Kernel from these other approaches (many of which have been
23.
by shasta 11y ago
Your last question is a good one. How can we set up checks and balances so that the surveillance apparatus cannot be misused? This is particularly important in our democracy, where the whims of the people might favor misusing it from time
24.
by shasta 11y ago
I anticipated the word games, which is why I wrote "or at least the dystopian society that the term is intended to conjure." I did not admit that most terrorism is in response to oppressive governments nor did I posit that there w
25.
by shasta 11y ago
Look, I value my privacy too and I don't want to live in a police state, either. I don't think giving additional power over to our government at its current levels of incompetence and corruption is a good idea. But I think you
26.
by shasta 11y ago
At the moment, the concern with encryption seems to be encrypted communication rather than encryption as a means of securing personal data. Eventually, though, as technology advances allow smaller groups of people to inflict larger amounts
27.
by shasta 11y ago
I'm hoping that AlgorithmicTime is making a fine distinction about what is a "right", rather than suggesting the disabled shouldn't receive help.
28.
by shasta 11y ago
Right, but "recite" was editorializing. That implies that the interviewer expected you to produce the answer from memory, as opposed to thinking about it. It's an easy question if you're familiar with moving window ave
29.
by shasta 11y ago
I agree, but I suspect "recite" was editorializing by the parent.
30.
by shasta 11y ago
or by 11.

More ›