DecayingOrganic

Thus, casting Anki as a mere tool of memorization is simply misleading.

"Educators rely heavily on learning activities that encourage elaborative studying, whereas activities that require students to practice retrieving and reconstructing knowledge are used less frequently. Here, we show that practicing retrieval produces greater gains in meaningful learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping. The advantage of retrieval practice generalized across texts identical to those commonly found in science education. The advantage of retrieval practice was observed with test questions that assessed comprehension and required students to make inferences. The advantage of retrieval practice occurred even when the criterial test involved creating concept maps. Our findings support the theory that retrieval practice enhances learning by retrieval-specific mechanisms rather than by elaborative study processes. Retrieval practice is an effective tool to promote conceptual learning about science."

[0]: http://sci-hub.tw/10.1126/science.1199327

1. Biological sex is defined in relation to the roles played in sexual reproduction.

2. Sexual reproduction involves only two, namely, male and female.

3. Thus, biological sex is only two, namely, male or female.

Consider the case of plants that reproduce sexually. When we discover a plant missing parts of its sexual organs, we do not thereby conclude that we have discovered a third sex. Rather biologists rightly concur that what you have found is a defective plant. Likewise, in human beings, when one has an extra chromosome, or defective genitalia, you have just that: a sexual defect at the physical level. Such people often are wonderful, loving, and morally upright persons, but physically something has gone wrong.

Hermaphrodites are individuals with both pairs of sex organs. While in very rare cases some human beings have both pairs of genitalia, in no case whatsoever has it ever been observed that both pairs are fully functioning. True human hermaphrodites with both male and female sexual organs that fully function don’t exist. Such is why no cases of self-fertilization have ever been recorded in human beings.

Even if we did discover an individual human being with both pairs of fully functioning sex organs, such a case would not disprove the binary distinction. What you would have is someone who is both male and female; one who is able to act either as male or female depending upon the other sex with which that individual desired to reproduce. Hermaphroditism, rather than disproving the traditional binary distinction, actually reinforces it. We would not even know hermaphrodites existed, let alone be able to speak of them, unless we knew of the male-female binary.

According to his theory, the mind has essentially infinite capacity for memories, but we have only a finite amount of time in which to search for them.

The key to a good human memory then becomes the same as the key to a good computer cache: predicting which items are most likely to be wanted in the future. That it’s a perfect tuning of the brain to the world, making available precisely the things most likely to be needed.

In putting the emphasis on time, caching shows us that memory involves unavoidable tradeoffs, and a certain zero-sumness. You can’t have every library book at your desk, every product on display at the front of the store, every headline above the fold, every paper at the top of the pile. And in the same way, you can’t have every fact or face or name at the front of your mind.

“Many people hold the bias that human memory is anything but optimal,” wrote Anderson and Schooler. “They point to the many frustrating failures of memory. However, these criticisms fail to appreciate the task before human memory, which is to try to manage a huge stockpile of memories. In any system responsible for managing a vast data base there must be failures of retrieval. It is just too expensive to maintain access to an unbounded number of items.”

From the book: Algorithms to Live By.

For example, searching: "word x" "sentence a" would prompt Google to show only pages that include both the word and the sentence in the same page.

it is important to distinguish the macro from the micro point of view.

From the micro point of view, a talented individual has a greater a priori probability to reach a high level of success than a moderately gifted one.

On the other hand, from the macro point of view of the entire society, the probability to find moderately gifted individuals at the top levels of success is greater than that of finding there very talented ones, because moderately gifted people are much more numerous and, with the help of luck, have - globally - a statistical advantage to reach a great success, in spite of their lower individual a priori probability.

In an op-ed promoting campaign finance reform, the Oracle of Omaha, Warren Buffett, proposed raising the limit on individual contributions from $1,000 to $5,000 and banning all other contributions. No corporate money, no union money, no soft money. It sounds great, except that it would never pass.

Campaign finance reform is so hard to pass because the incumbent legislators who have to approve it are the ones who have the most to lose. Their advantage in fundraising is what gives them job security. How do you get people to do something that is against their interest? Put them in what is known as the prisoners’ dilemma. According to Buffett:

Well, just suppose some eccentric billionaire (not me, not me!) made the following offer: If the bill was defeated, this person—the E.B.—would donate $1 billion in an allowable manner (soft money makes all possible) to the political party that had delivered the most votes to getting it passed. Given this diabolical application of game theory, the bill would sail through Congress and thus cost our E.B. nothing (establishing him as not so eccentric after all).

Consider your options as a Democratic legislator. If you think that the Republicans will support the bill and you work to defeat it, then if you are successful, you will have delivered $1 billion to the Republicans, thereby handing them the resources to dominate for the next decade. Thus there is no gain in opposing the bill if the Republicans are supporting it. Now, if the Republicans are against it and you support it, then you have the chance of making $1 billion.

Thus whatever the Republicans do, the Democrats should support the bill. Of course, the same logic applies to the Republicans. They should support the bill no matter what the Democrats do. In the end, both parties support the bill, and our billionaire gets his proposal for free. As a bonus, Buffett notes that the very effectiveness of his plan “would highlight the absurdity of claims that money doesn’t influence Congressional votes.”

This situation is called a prisoners’ dilemma because both sides are led to take an action that is against their mutual interest. In the classic version of the prisoners’ dilemma, the police are separately interrogating two suspects. Each is given an incentive to be the first to confess and a much harsher sentence if he holds out while the other confesses. Thus each finds it advantageous to confess, though they would both do better if each kept quiet.

From the book The Art of Strategy. Great book.

[0]: https://techcrunch.com/2018/08/08/anki-has-sold-1-5-million-...

The single necessary and sufficient condition for a business is a paying customer. The day someone pays you money for your product or service, you have a business, and not a day before. You cannot define a business as a product, because if nobody buys your product, you simply do not have a business. The marketplace is the final arbiter of success.

Now, just because you have a paying customer does not mean you have a good business. In order to have a good, sustainable business, you will need to gain enough customers paying enough money within a relatively short period of time so you do not run out of capital, but instead, become profitable. And as a startup, you have few resources, so every action you take must be hyper-efficient.

Therefore, you will not start by building a product or hiring developers or recruiting salespeople. Instead, you will take a customer-driven approach by finding an unmet need and building your business around it.

Premise 1: There's this big problem of inequality

Premise 2: UBI is not a perfect solution for solving this inequality

Therefore, probably,

Conclusion: We should reject this solution

This is called Nirvana fallacy [0], also known as the perfect solution fallacy. For example: "Seat belts are a bad idea. People are still going to die in car crashes."

[0]: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Nirvana_fallacy

Well, I believe evidence-based allegations.

To really understand the environment here in the US, think about the Salem Witch Trials in the 1690s. Mass hysteria, rules of evidence suspended, sentences mandated before trials took place, the rights of defendants to face their accusers denied.

The judge's fate will be determined by the prejudice each of us brings to his "case" and our subjective reaction to which of the two parties is the more "believable" -- by which we mean that party that most accords with our prejudices. Judge Kavenaugh's fate will, thus, be decided by a popularity contest held during an era of feminine triumphalism.

But, as a matter of fact, it is rather common to underestimate the importance of external forces in individual successful stories. It is very well known that intelligence (or, more in general, talent and personal qualities) exhibits a Gaussian distribution among the population, whereas the distribution of wealth - often considered a proxy of success - follows typically a power law (Pareto law), with a large majority of poor people and a very small number of billionaires. Such a discrepancy between a Normal distribution of inputs, with a typical scale (the average talent or intelligence), and the scale invariant distribution of outputs, suggests that some hidden ingredient is at work behind the scenes."

I would highly recommend people here to take a look at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07068

"Customers can choose to further encrypt the messages prior to sending and after receiving for end- to-end encryption as needed (but this will cause moderation tools and search features to malfunction)."

Reddit may prefer to not provide end-to-end encryption due to reasons, say, keyword marketing.

So we need to look at the issue in a rather more elaborate way and look for both its upsides and downsides.

For example Ray Dalio may have not succeeded applying this technique to his own company; Bridgewater. Because for him, creating a culture of radical transparency and truthfulness is so important. I wonder how he would be able to create such a culture and preserve it if the employees were not working in a common building.

liked the project by the way!

It also shows up in your example as well. Maybe you don't get bothered by it? :)

Please note: the bug is inconsistent, it pops out inconsistently.

Here's the part: "GET OUR DAILY NEWSLETTER Upgrade your inbox and get our Daily Dispatch and Editor's Picks."

It's just when you are not social, you may be reluctant to ask for help when it's actually needed the most.

If you find that you can't break this wall yourself, don't be afraid to ask for help.

https://i.imgur.com/g94LOvE.png

It uses around 35MB.