grog454

> Exploits need to plug into a business plan

Or, you know, develop a new "business plan" around an exploit.

I would think so. Who says that's not happening now? It seems reasonable that evolutionary pressure can be strong enough to have a significant impact in 1-2 generations (for example due to the introduction of a new environmental threat) or weak enough to take thousands of generations.

.io. There have been more Nebulous's since I last checked :)

> Are there any other products with such a small team and a huge userbase?

My game Nebulous was 1.5 devs (one full time one part time) and multiple millions of MAU. 9.5 years later it's still going well.

> when the business requires more coding and technical debt comes how do they manage it

Delete bad code. Replace with good code. Sounds simple enough but in my experience at mega and mid corps, step 1 is almost never done. Whether that's because of ego or chasing local optima I'm not sure - probably a mix of both.

The article clearly defines someone who always lies to mean they only make false statements. It's not hard or ambiguous to determine various scenarios in which "all my hats are green" is false.

The solution article also discusses vacuous truths ("all my hats are green" is true if you have no hats, vacuously). Truth has a definition in formal logic too, but we've gotten far enough that this problem is already solvable and unambiguous.

I scrolled down. Then I scrolled up. Then I scrolled down. Then I scrolled up. Then I was ready to leave so I hit the back button. Only instead of that happening, I was scrolled up, and down, and up, and down, and up, and then I could leave.

Taken to the extreme, I think it becomes more apparent which choice is better.

> you have to do some analysis to show your chance of killing someone on the ground is less than 1 in 10,000

How'd people decide to accept 1 out of 10,000 killing someone? Maybe the metric should be deaths per year since the number will only go up over time. To be fair, I have no idea what it is right now.

I'm not a scientist because of fraud and other reason related to academia, but I thought one of the tennets of an experiment was reproducibility. Were his experiments reproduced independently? Why not?

There is a trivial solution to this. Store your own copy (or hash, or whatever) of the article and don't rank it until your copy is at least a month old.

The idea is still nonesense because some other search engine will show up without this restriction, and any news site would prefer to be listed there, rather than not.

Either there's some kind of update batching or it's already happening.

> by default repetition makes things worse instead of better

Can you elaborate on this a bit? My intuition is that, by default, statistical models benefit from larger N. But I have no experience in quantum physics.

> Some illiterate people are told that all bears in the north are white, that Greenland is a country in the north, then they are asked what colours bears in Greenland have. They answer, "Different regions have differently coloured bears. I haven't been to Greenland. But I have seen a brown bear."

I wonder how much the answer would change if you simply said "if all bears in the north..." It's probably not obvious to everyone whether you're setting up a hypothetical or asking a literal question with a false or vague premise (Grizzlies range as far north as the nothern coast of Alaska).

How does the OS know which pages to mark?

Whenever I've asked for a different seat at a restaurant, I've been granted it no questions asked and no tip given.

Paying to skip ahead in a line sounds more like a bribe than a tip, is this isn't some kind of advertised service.

Yes. Although I'm not going to quote my exact wording. Feel free to scroll up and/or familiarize yourself with the game if you're having trouble understanding.

The second article mentions delay based and rollback both of which seem to be appropriate for peer to peer graphs, but there is a third option: server authority. I created a game with mechanics very roughly analogous to fighting games (nebulous.io) where there is no client side prediction, no rollback, and a 20hz update loop. Clients just render what the server reports (with some smoothing). I never get complaints about fairness, and players can quickly learn to adapt to their latency to servers located in different regions. Its as well now as it did in 2015, when a significant portion of players used 3g or worse cellular connections.

For <4 elements, a pure "if" / "else" implementation would probably be optimal.

DiffEQ was probably my favorite math class in college. Eventually I created https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=simplicial.sof..., originally for a course about computer graphics. I think it lays the foundation for an intuitive understanding of the basic concepts in a way that a text book cannot.

Yeah, hospitals can't stand that kind of thing...

> If a hospital gets a toddler with fractures on their skull, society should damn well figure out how it got them and stop it from happening again.

What a leap (the kind the article is calling out by the way). Do you really think all causes for toddler skull fractures are a societal problem?

> Because the only thing you can ever have is a theory.

Here's mine: there is a "correct" set of theories (or truths) that the universe adheres to, we're just nowhere close to even guessing at them yet. But current theories can be closer or farther to them

I had the same thought. 60-80 years is probably longer than the average lifespan 5,000 years ago, so a surprising period for a "tradition".

I had a similar experience earlier in my education. "Learning" sine and cosine was nothing compared to understanding it well enough to use in a 2d game. I went from struggling with standard algebra classes to getting 5s on AP Calculus BC and Physics.

Someone who thinks they know more than they do is a lot more dangerous than someone who doesn't know much but realizes it.

> The feedback of the people seeing the polished demo was fantastic, but now I'm sitting here with my 5 GitHub stars on the repo, after I put like 2.5 extra months of work into it. Maybe it led to more people noticing it, and finding it useful. Maybe not.

Those 2.5 extra months could save orders of magnitude more (for users) if it does find success. The problem is those 2.5 months often don't translate into higher likelihood of success.

> I can't think of a single rationale for this.

I can: MAU

Why? What kinds of things might you be able to do through your wife that require all this scrutiny?

> Nothing about the system would have been compromised by publicly announcing they had detected an anomaly the day of the event vs 4 days later.

Have you worked on classified detection systems? Actions and conclusions don't always appear to follow logic when your priors are wrong.

And those are all valid reasons to delay release. My point is that they are not mutually exclusive with declassification, or verification that the information is OK to release publicly from a security standpoint. I'm not sure why secrecy automatically means "conspiracy theory".

An excellent read but one thing caught my attention:

> The Navy did not withhold information on the detection for four days out of some concern for secrecy.

I think it's more likely than not that the statement is correct, but what gives the author the authority to make the claim so definitively? The author's bio indicates he's a consultant and there is no indication of direct involvement in this or any other SAR effort.

While the workings of the SOSUS and IUSS systems may be declassified, the deployments and capabilities (mostly range and computation related) of such systems most likely are not. And there is always the possibility that there is yet another system the author simply isn't aware of.

IMO, it isn't negligence to value the secrecy of systems used for defense above some number of lives, in some situations.