cujic9

Interesting idea, but seems impractical because it causes very weird incentives:

* Can a company exist in both the "normal" exchange and the "long term" exchange at the same time? If so, can I short on the normal exchange and buy on the long term exchange for some free voting power that increases over time?

* Many (most?) consumer-facing brokerages make a significant portion of their revenue by lending out their customers' securities. Voting rights transfer to the borrower of the security. Would this be the same in a long-term exchange? If yes, then this will break the existing revenue model. Online brokerages will need to make the money elsewhere (likely by charging higher trading fees), and this will push consumers back into existing exchanges with low cost trades.

* How long until there is a secondary market for buying and selling voting rights?

I agree. Functional programming should not be viewed as a tuxedo that we dust off and use when we want to be "fancy programmers." It's simply a tool in the toolbox.

The best language for learning functional programming is the one that de-mystifies it. And since you can use many (most?) popular languages to code in a functional style, I'd say, take whatever language the students have been using, and teach them a few functional programming techniques with it.

> I think you are giving far too much credit to a simple like button.

I'm giving credit to the thousands of engineering hours that gave rise to the simple like button, and weeded out the less addictive alternatives. (Remember the poke button?)

> It's the content of the user's post that the person is liking, not the genius of Facebook.

I agree.

> Note, also, that on a Lisp-family language, creating a DSL is very easy.

I'd argue that this is a bug, not a feature. Yes, DSLs can make for elegant code, but it comes at a high cost in the form of a hidden dependency: the state of the DSL author's brain.

In order for us to share a codebase with a DSL, I now need to understand your unique, high-level view of the problem, and be able to speak it fluently.

And if your view of the problem is incorrect, I need to be able to hold two conflicting viewpoints in my head and find a way to resolve them. (Something that humans find quite difficult.)

Strange. I found that my children have caused me to be much more disciplined, productive, and organized. It's just that much of my energy now goes toward raising good kids.

1. Spend ~3 minutes stretching and doing light exercise (pushups / situps) upon waking every morning.

2. Skip breakfast. Just black coffee until lunch. The intention is to train your body to get its energy from fat reserves (a more stable source) instead of the sugars in the food you just ate.

3. Cast aside desires, in the Buddhist sense. I found that, with just a little mental shift, I could "let go" of many daily frustrations that were sapping my energy.

EDIT: 4. GTD

Your argument isn't sound. It doesn't matter who gives the rewards, what matters is the conditions under which the recipient receives the rewards.

> Thanks to Skinner's work, brain MRIs, and more recent research by psychologists, neuro-scientists, and behavioral economists, we now know how to design cue, activity, and reward systems to more effectively leverage our brain chemistry and program human behavior.

Effectively, Facebook designed a system that gives people rewards for giving people rewards.

Isn't every ICO purchase a mistake?

Yes, commercial media is a problem because it ultimately follows advertising dollars. But what's the alternative? A blogger / amateur journalist could not have broken a story about Russia's involvement and made it stick. They would either be ignored or labeled a conspiracy theorist.

I think you are a bit confused.

Credit cards only matter to Equifax and other credit scoring companies because of the "instant loan" that they give to a consumer. The banks that issue credit cards want to know if the consumer will pay back that loan.

As long as consumers can get instant loans through some kind of mechanism (credit card, phone, pinky swear, etc.) there will be a role for credit scores and the companies that generate them.

I agree. The author should just omit the "Made with love in $COUNTRY" line. No need for all these hoops.

Do you think GitHub has grown complacent?

IMO they continue to innovate quite quickly, on multiple fronts.

> The problem is while presenting my IQ is 20 points lower.

I swear I've said these exact words.

What's the name for the bias whereby someone reads this list once or twice and then thinks they are immune to cognitive biases? ;-)

It's one thing to read a list of biases, and another to recognize biases in the field. I've been studying biases for years, and still occasionally fail to recognize them when they are staring me in the face.

How do you practice?

Yes to Merino wool! I don't own a t-shirt or socks made out of cotton anymore.

That's too risky. It relies on the herd running in a specific direction.

I'm talking about profiting off of the predictability that exists as a result of there being a herd. You can find a way to make money no matter what direction the herd moves.

To put it a different way, see that tree over there? Right now it is much more likely that 1,000 buffalo run past that tree vs. one and only one buffalo runs past that tree. That's how a herd works. This is the opposite of how the market usually behaves, and I imagine there is some mis-pricing to be found as a result.

That's interesting. I love the idea of sites exposing various types of data through plain text files with well-known names. Kind of like (a vastly simplified) RSS feed, but for whatever. Or something vaguely like Gopher sites, back in the day.

But then, the company would want to brand it, and the marketing team would want to track views, and the sales team would want some kind of call to action, and the product managers would want to make it cross platform and internationalized. And suddenly we're back at something that looks like HTML. sigh

Talk to potential customers, and pursue whatever seems to have the most traction.

Lose money?

No offense taken. I was on Wall Street in another life.

I don't know if there will be a crash. The market went up slowly, it could also go down slowly. That's the Fed's goal, it seems.

I do think that any time a bunch of people are making a bunch of money without knowing how or why, but by simply following the herd, it is leading to a dangerous place.

This is happening right now in the S&P 500 and other index funds. Everybody is getting the same advice ("buy index funds") and following it blindly.

I expect there will either be some kind of sea change where the herd starts moving (possibly stampeding) in the other direction, or someone on Wall Street is going to figure out how to take advantage of the movements of the herd.

But this is all speculation. If I knew for sure, I'd be a billionaire in the next few years.

The opposite of an open source book.

I'd assume the parent is thinking of something like the "Pro Git" book, available on Github as code and licensed under creative commons. https://github.com/progit/progit2

Man, I'm convinced that half of my computer knowledge comes from jumping through the hoops of the early internet to find dirty pictures.

Back in my day, you had to buy a box of parts at the local computer store, put them together, buy a modem, figure out how to install it, find a local BBS that provided internet, install and configure Trumpet Winsock, get a usenet reader, script it to download the Base64 encoded data, write another program to combine the parts and decode it.

Now a kid gets an iPad and types "boobs".

I think the entire investor class in the US is currently experiencing a bubble. By "investor class" I mean anybody who has a significant amount of money in stocks or bonds.

The bubble was inflated by the quantitative easing that the Fed has done across the past 9 years in order to prevent the 2008 recession from turning into another great depression.

The bubble has led to asset price inflation both in the US and elsewhere. Basically, investors have money, but consumers don't. So the money is chasing assets (stocks, bonds, houses, Bitcoin) rather than starting new businesses or growing existing businesses. (Why build a business if your potential customers are broke?)

The average US consumer with no savings, on the other hand, has seen wages stagnate. As a result, the prices of consumer goods have stayed roughly the same. That's why the Fed has been able to pump trillions of dollars into the economy without causing massive inflation. The inflation is happening, just not in consumer goods where we typically measure it.

That's why the Fed's recent decision to reduce their balance sheet is so interesting and so important. They are going to gradually make a few trillion dollars of easy money disappear, and it's going to let the air out of the bubble. To do this, they are going to stop buying new bonds with the cash from old bonds that have matured.

The hope is that by deflating the bubble in a transparent and gradual way, they can avoid any type of severe market movements, and can take their foot off the gas pedal (or brake, more accurately) if/when necessary.

Ha yes! Bonus points when the book is for IBM Basic, and you're using a Commodore 64. Argggggg!

It has certainly enabled more humans to exist. It has created way better conditions for many of those humans. And it has created unimaginable suffering for just as many humans.

I wouldn't get rid of capitalism, but I certainly wouldn't give it a superlative. It's kind of like saying that domestication is the best thing that has happened to chickens, cause look how many more of them there are, and wow some of them live on a free range.

Yeah, I'll admit that was a strawman so I could get to my real point about requiring some digital competency before granting access to state secrets.

If that were possible, then I would agree. But in my experience, automating the boilerplate stuff just tends to expand the domain of what can be considered boilerplate stuff.

If I can rename a class across my project in 3 keystrokes, then I've automated it. But then I'll try out a dozen names before settling on something. Have I saved time? Perhaps I'd be better off thinking deeply for a minute or two instead.

It's kind of like how Powerpoint has actually increased the time that people spend making presentations. "Look! I can change the title font in one click!" <Spends the next 2 hours fiddling with fonts.>

True, I could run a barebones [1] Emacs. But I want to align my use of the tool with the underlying ethos of the tool itself.

I think of it as being similar to CISC [2] vs. RISC [3], or Chinese characters vs. the Latin alphabet.

Emacs is CISC. It starts with a huge vocabulary of functions. If you intend to use it right, then you create new functions to add to the vocabulary. Eventually, it morphs into something that not even other power Emacs users can use. (The programmable editor.)

Vim is RISC. It starts with a small vocabulary of compose-able commands. If you intend to use it right, then you learn to make increasingly complicated sentences out of that vocabulary.

1: For some definition of "barebones" -- Emacs ships with Tetris inside!

2: CISC - Complex Instruction Set Computer

3: RISC - Reduced Instruction Set Computer

Just switched to Vim after a decade of using Emacs. The switch was one part of a larger life goal to simplify and embrace minimalism.

I think this shift in mindset was an essential part of being able to learn Vim.

In Emacs, I had dozens of plugins, and I could do everything so fast that I almost went on autopilot. This was great for boilerplate code that's 90% typing and 10% thinking, but not great for complicated code (Haskell, low level machine learning stuff) that is 10% typing and 90% thinking.

I disagree with his "charisma is bullshit" thesis. All skills have extreme outliers. There was the fastest sprinter in your high school, and then there is Usain Bolt. Similarly, there was the most charismatic guy you've ever worked with, and then there is Steve Jobs.

Re: management and leadership philosophies? I agree; complete bullshit. There is no perfect management philosophy. If there were, it would be a science and everybody would follow it.

I do like a good "how to manage" book though. The point of management books (or any self-improvement books for that matter) is to let you swim in the subject matter for a while, and think about how you would have handled past experiences better. And also to show you that it is possible to get better at things, and worth it to try.