chalst

This can be modelled formally: just drop the ex falso quodlibet axiom and its equivalents.

This could be indicated in a comment, perhaps using a *RFI-like notation.

...is taken as true but is a really lousy principle for modelling informal reasoning.

An attempt to Google 'killology' returned to Wikipedia article on Dave Grossman:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Grossman_(author)

The article claims he is the source of research into 'killology', but makes it pretty clear that he is against the costs that the more violent approaches to policing involve. He was on the prosecution team for Timothy McVeigh, FWIW.

Has there been a subsequent move in the usage of 'killology'?

> My argument is that a very large proportion

What is the actual proportion?

The proportion you argue is neither here nor there.

Five submissions in 70 days is rather less than a spam campaign in my view.

> Non-proliferation folks who think they can actually rid the world of nukes. Will not happen.

It looks to me that you're shifting the goalposts here: nonproliferation has effectively reduced the number of countries with access to nukes. Or is worrying about the number of direct military conflicts between nuclear-armed powers an example of what you call 'missing the point'?

NetBSD's pkgsrc makes it easy to run several different package repositories, mixing releases.

> at least we can hold them responsible when they don't deliver it.

These are people who have a track record of evading responsibility.

I like the insight that the the depressed don't suffer from the feeling of depression, they suffer from an ecology of mutually reinforcing emotions; cf. the picture on https://medium.com/@makinwellness/how-depression-actually-fe...

'Feeling nothing' I don't believe is a thing, rather the failure to know what you feel means you have isolated your consciousness from awareness of how you actually feel. That's a sign of the disconnection you are talking about.

Connecting with others is hugely important, but also a hard step. Exercise can help, and can be seen as connecting with yourself. Don't attack yourself for failing to meet any particular exercise target, though.

> You're stealing from companies that create economic acceleration to create economic friction.

At the margins, there's going to be some truth to this, but the kind of financier who is wowed by this kind of demo isn't skilled at telling what innovations are deserving.

> If we keep rewarding scammers with this notion that they're doing anything remotely of value, we end up with a society of Roger Stone and Trump types who are really good at seeking out and winning negative sum games.

I'd really drain a lot of money from the class of financiers as a whole and move it to households and non-financial industry. If we'd responded to 2008 with widespread haircuts on bad lenders and nationalisation of failing banks, instead of bailouts for banks and inflating the financial system via QE, we would have moved int this direction.

Musk is not a good example of the entrepreneur, but he's not in the same class as Stone, who kind of mobilised the Oath Keepers as his private heavies, or Trump, who depends on intimidation and personal dominance to run his business affairs.

Sorry, my comment is based on out-of-date information. The first three of the conferences used to be single-blinded.

> We believe an implementation written entirely in the language it implements has some engineering benefits. The first is that a programmer does not need to know any other language, in order to modify any part of their implementation.

Scheme48 was based on itself as a bootstrap language, with the restriction that only those closures that could be stack allocated were allowed. This restricted Scheme the implementors called Prescheme and it was pretty readable.

Do you know all the laws that apply to you? If you don't, that's some selectivity right there.

Interesting. An associate of Burroughs, Ian Sommerville, wrote a program in the 1960s to permute lists of words to help Burroughs for similar reasons.

There used to be quite a thing for randomised conpositions in the Baroque era and later, called Musikalisches Würfelspiel.

There was also a thing around tape cut-ups in the 1950s, with William Burroughs being very into this stuff, with David Bowie later picking some of this stuff up. It was more about deconstructing expectations than creating something beautiful, but some of the material is very interesting.

For the first, see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musikalisches_W%C3%BCrfelspi...

Double-blinding is not common in PL theory and implementation.

So what would you want to have happening in the case Cantrill was talking about? The aim is to have good systems and there have been plenty of bad holistic systems in the history of computing. But by good, non-holistic systems, do you mean that we have a motherboard with well-documented firmware that the buyer of the hardware can't see into except according to the interfaces the vendor has provided? This seems to be potentially hiding the kind of information about a malfunctioning system that gets Cantrill so worked up about.

Cantrill talks about an experience he had at Joyent, where he diagnosed that memory was failing on systems, but the errors were suppressed by the firmware. Having adequate documentation of the firmware doesn't help you in this kind of sutuation. Holistic systems would not lie about what the system is doing in this way.

Oh, I don't know, perhaps if you look at any if the huge amount of material from journalism schools on what journalism is and how it should be done, or maybe at journalism's many professional bodies and their codes of ethics, that will give you some ideas?

Cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalism_ethics_and_standard...

Most of what I've read by Raymond Chen is about Windows 95. Does he contradict what people are saying about backwards incompatibility since Windows 8?

Lean is particularly exciting because of the work Kevin Buzzard has been doing in the Xena project:

https://www.ma.imperial.ac.uk/~buzzard/xena/

He started by getting undergraduates to tackle formalising the maths they did in Lean, and his success with this as a didactic tool has spread the idea among quite a lot if mathematicians.

Good that you are looking after yourself.

Wrt. #2, maybe there's a fear of what a rollout of the project will commit you to. If so, then redefining the project so it's goal is to have a deliverable, rather than rolling it out, will help. You can then, with the luxury of having the implementation finished, take the time you need to reach a decision you are happy with.

Wrt. #3, I recommend taking a break and make a fresh list of what you think are the time-consuming remaining tasks.

It sounds to me that you are close to getting over this bump. Hope this AskHN thread is helping.

Right. This denial by Grammarly deserves to have more light shone on it.

Willing to help, but first I 'd like to hear a bit more about your situation:

1. Have you been getting enough sleep in the past days? I did 90-hour week to finish my doctoral dissertation and much of what I did in the last days of that week was very problematic.

2. Is there some particular doubt about the project that you might have, perhaps even be suppressing in your drive to finish? It can often be wise to take time to write up these doubts. You can likely come back and review them once you are past your finish line.

3. Have the last bits of the project become unexpectedly harder and more time-consuming? This can be a sign that you need to re-evaluate your expectations about what the last steps involve.

That you've been well-motivated until recently is a very good sign. With new kinds of project, it is common for finishing off to be harder than you expect, but from the sounds of it, I think you are close to the end.

tl;dr: Grammarly seems to effectively be a keylogger, despite their denials, as past bugs have shown.

The article is about the single market, which long predates the single currency.

The Economist in the 90s was pro single market: https://www.economist.com/leaders/1997/03/13/single-market-s...

Paypal is more expensive.

Because teenagers with suicidal thoughts are most often lacking the sense of perspective about their situation they would gain with maturity.

This is a case where rigidly-based reasoning about rights fails the common-sense test.

> I left our existing Paypal integration in place, and shockingly almost 25% of my transactions still come from people who deliberately click on and decide to use Paypal in place of just a simple "enter your credit card information" form.

European here, but perhaps my experience is relevant: for nearly all the online credit-card processors, this step will require push-TAN and will fail for me. A fair proportion of websites are buggy and will not gracefully recover the session after the processor reports failure. Paypal, in contrast, has always been unproblematic.

I'm patient and generally try the card before Paypal, but impatient customers in the same boat may behave differently.