1,070 karma · joined February 20, 2017
Financial markets with Bob Shiller (Yale 2008):
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8F7E2591EE283A2E
Financial markets with Bob Shiller (Yale 2011):
https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8FB14A2200B87185
Smart-as-a-whip, scathing rationality of John Geanakoplos in his financial theory course.
Financial Theory with John Geanakoplos (Yale 2011):
repo of scripts mentioned: https://github.com/narkoz/hacker-scripts
Is taste arbitrary?
Do human preferences have a basis?
Do human preferences have constraints?
If so, are these bases or constraints available for academic study?
I asked, “Are you advocating a system where giving airtime to certain ideas, but not including incitement, would be punishable?”
They answered in the affirmative.
The justification being that entertaining certain ideas itself constitutes harm (because entertaining ideas may be proximate to harm or “increases the likelihood of harm”).
We also got into definitions of “harm”, which, in my view, were expansive. (In the sense that nearly anything could be rationalized as resulting in harm.)
Which questions are fair game for academic inquiry?
Which are not?
How do we know ahead of time what will be useful and what won't be?
Is the question above this line academically useful?
* Speech that benefits me but does not necessarily benefit you.
Are people free to make untrue statements?
Are people free to make “falsified” statements?
Are statements inducements?
It is. And it ought to be.
The version being espoused here is conditional or contingent free expression.
It doesn't mean much.
In this form, expression is permitted only to the extent it is “enlarging understanding and uncovering truth.”
Is this the (sole) purpose of expression?
> Don't let the existence of someone be the excuse you use to tell yourself you couldn't also do something cool or great.
(It would be nice to tinker.)
I should have clarified, by “REPL for the cell”, I meant one accessible to kids with an interest in science.
Nevertheless, you gave a great computational description of the cell! Wonderful analogies.
There is no REPL for the cell. No tinkering allowed.
When Marvin Minsky was growing up in New York, neighborhood pharmacists owned fluoroscopes. He said those fluoroscopes were like “great black boxes” to him and that “those kinds of black boxes don't exist for kids anymore.”
> How do we model the probability distribution of rolling a six sided die if all we have is a fair coin? In other words, a process where, by flipping a coin enough times, we uniformly generate a random integer between 1 and 6. Donald Knuth studied this problem and came up with the following solution: […]
[0] https://twitter.com/trishume/status/1591995028842418176?t=Gz...
--pinboarding since 2011
> The differential analyzer solved these complex differential equations by numerically approximating them. The machine could do this even though it contained no electronic circuits, logic gates, or anything else that we might associate with a digital computer. It relied instead on the interplay of various mechanical moving parts to compute results.
If old bonds have pitiful rates compared to new issues, the pool of buyers for the old is thin and bond prices suffer.
This is especially bad for those in retirement who sell bonds to fund living expenses.
To draw on Robin Hanson, the less you understand why you did something, the better you project to others you did it for the right reasons.
Err, wait, ummm, it looks like we first need a R.E.C.U.R.S.I.O.N. to establish the R.E.C.U.R.S.I.O.N.