shardinator

1. Learn regex properly and thoroughly, in one go. Learning it incrementally, will take a lot more time in the long run.

2. Write code that works reasonably well, then refactor it to be smart/elegant.

iPhone?

Tried to signup with Facebook, go the "this app is still in development mode ..."

Nonetheless this could be interesting.

May I ask a very honest and innocent question? Are you African American?

Hi Bozho, thanks so much for your help over the years. SO might be in decline, but it's one of those few products that makes you realise that better product design can change things for the better.

Related to a lot of discussion comments, I highly recommend "A Random Walk Down Wallstreet" by Burton Malkiel. https://www.amazon.com/Random-Walk-Down-Wall-Street/dp/03933...

Not sure if this is what you're asking, but if fund returns are random but different, then someone is going to have the best performing fund.

Let's say the best performing fund is (fictional) Xanadu Investments we'd ask, how do we explain Xanadu's performance.

That escalated quickly

That sounds exactly right, once we reach a tipping point it will happen quickly.

I think it's a lot like the 'paper less office'. It was talked about for a decade before it happened and it wasn't a linear progression. At first it meant more paper, as people were doing all sorts of 'silly' things, like printing out and filing emails.

But today I can't remember the last time I printed something or read something on paper.

Too poor for a NYT subscription :( ... actually just checked their prices, quite reasonable.

I understand this is just the basics, but the URL is also crucial. Keywords in the URL (that match the page content) will give you order of magnitude better results.

It would be closed for being off-topic ;)

Thanks! Hadn't heard of the Texas sharpshooter fallacy.

There's also another phenomenon at play. The probability that a particular rare event occurs is very rare. But the probability that any one of many, many possible rare events occurs is actually much higher.

More concretely: If you have a billion possible independent events with a one in a billion probability of occurring on any given day. Then on average one of those incredibly rare events will happen everyday.

Looks like they just need a bigger (wider) ship. Problem solved :)

It's all about when it was done. Before the GFC everyone believed that if you were rich you were smart and the opposite. If you challenged this you were a loser.

Then along came a cranky old uncle, who had no business being in the building, except that he did.

Turns out he had a point and now we consider these ideas trivial.

Today if you say all people are born equal and deserve equal rights 99% of the world will agree. There was a time when this wasn't true.

What you say + when you say it = what it's worth

Thanks, it was too easy to be a big solution.

So no one plants a new seed

Yes. Via chatbots. Dead serious.

Perhaps this is a little off-topic, but I'm convinced we can save a lot of water by replacing showering with steaming (followed by super short shower to rinse). I recently bought a facial steamer for allergy issues. 50ml of water get's me more steam than I can bother to use. I'm usually done with 20ml.

I can't help but imagine that 1L of water would produce plenty of steam to clean us off. If we then have a quick shower, say 30 sec. Not only are we saving water, but probably also time, and you get a much cleaner, fresher feeling.

We use about 35L of water to shower per person each day (I know I use more), and assuming we have 1 shower a day (I generally have 2), then we are roughly saving 30L/p/day.

We use about 120L/p/day so saving 30L is a 25% saving. Now that is pretty big.

I'm not pretending I know how to get everyone to steam instead of shower - perhaps Las Vegas hotels could include steamers, and encourage people to steam followed by a super short shower. But just saying if we wanted to make our water last longer, we do have a way that doesn't involve loosing anything of real value (I'm assuming everyone agrees that a quick steam is equivalent to a shower).

* Daily water use per person http://www.melbournewater.com.au/waterdata/wateruse/pages/de...

* Water use for shower, http://www.yvw.com.au/home/inyourhome/understandingyourwater... ~ 7L/m * 5min = 35L/shower

or 'started' not sure if I'm joking

Pre-euro Australia was more like Europe with different tribes/nations that shared common characteristics yet still had their own languages and cultures.

Compare and contrast the difference in sophistication between the Romans and the gauls or germanic tribes around 200AD, they would seem totally different worlds. It could have been similar in Aus.

Other indigenous Australian groups invented the boomerang - first ever practical use of aerofoil technology - precursor of modern flight and the woomera which launches a spear around 700-800m with accuracy.

From what I remember their art was somewhat codified so it could almost be "read", this would make it easier to share information across time and place.

If you have groups on two ends of the continent sharing very similar stories, then at least you'd have to allow the reasonable possibility it's more than just random noise.

There's an important idea I feel is being missed. Something can be true "in distribution" but not true in a "pathwise" sense. That means, over the long run, for most people, on average x is true. But for specific individual and/or specific time frame it can be very untrue.

Point being I can say to you "adopt a growth mindset", you do it, but it doesn't work and life throws you 'a curve ball' again and again. Doesn't mean my hypothesis was wrong, and doesn't mean you didn't follow through properly. We can both be right in this case.

All it means is, we should act as if our actions/thoughts count, but accept it as a fundamental property of the universe that they may not 'bear fruit'.

All we can do is embrace the chaos^

^ as in chaotic systems

Yes I agree. The real question is, would removing the extra 10 million results give you a distinct advantage? I don't feel it would.

But if the first 10-15 are valuable and rich and the rest don't slow you down or disadvantage you, isn't it the same thing.

and get Indian food in Britain

Not sure if it's right to post this. Small typo in Making Money section:

... if your product if your product is easy to sell.

Should be

... if your product is easy to sell.

I think the real problem is that "marketing job" and "field marine biology study" are preferred to teaching. Finding a way to make teaching a job people want, and keep wanting after doing it for a while, is the key.

My guess is they spent (at least some of) it on paid customer acquisition. But this is only a guess.

Personally I think the real opportunity is building the tech to enable these local stores that you mention. Selling tech is much more scalable and higher margin and you take advantage of the existing delivery networks + customer relationships.

You would still have to eat costs for a few years, but long term I think those are the teams that will build the really significant companies.