By that logic, the library of Babel owns the copyright on every piece of literature that could be written, which would be a terrible idea.
1,377 karma · joined August 10, 2010
That might not happen every game but it is advantageous to get a monopoly sooner rather than later. Like I said earlier you can also factor in how much money your opponents have when deciding whether to go to auction or pay list price. If everyone is cash poor that opens up opportunities for you to get deeds for low cost, increasing the properties future rate of return.
The randomness in the game means you can't just pick one optimal strategy and apply it to every game and every opponent. And if your opponents change strategy (or your opponents change), you need to adapt your strategy to accommodate for that as well.
edit: As far as the math goes, here's one such article that goes over it: https://ideas.ted.com/heres-how-to-win-at-monopoly-according...
another edit: There's also a limited amount of houses/hotels the bank has, so there's strategy around getting houses first and leaving your opponents unable to build up their monopolies (another frequent house rule is that there unlimited houses too buy from the bank). If multiple players are trying to buy houses at once and there's not enough, the houses are auctioned again to the highest bidder (hello capitalism housing shortages).
You can also sell properties you own, or choose to stay in jail (frequent house rule is that you can't collect money while in jail, but this isn't an official rule).
>there is an element of strategy in Monopoly (or can be, if you take the time to learn it).
Buying every property you land on immediately from the bank for listed price is not an optimal strategy.
Not necessarily. The games rules include an auction that is frequently removed in house rules. What's supposed to happen is if the player who lands on the space (Player A) doesn't buy it from the bank, the property is auctioned to all players.
Maybe no one owns Boardwalk yet, and Player A doesn't want to try and get the Park Place/Boardwalk monopoly. Or maybe Boardwalk is owned by Player B but Player B doesn't have any cash, so Player A thinks they can block the monopoly while paying less to the bank. Or maybe Player B does have the cash but Player A knows that B is desperate for the monopoly, so they want to drive the price up and force them to pay more.
There's more to than just rolling dice and landing on spaces.
Playing with common house rules tends to remove elements of strategy.
I've been thinking about it and I can't fathom how we would know of every case.
What percentage of adults who get the seasonal flu go see a doctor and get diagnosed, 10%? Coronavirus symptoms mimic the flu and can even by asymptomatic in people, meaning people can easily attribute symptoms to a bad cold/flu or not even notice them. On average someone with coronavirus spreads it to 3-4 other people. It's estimated that the virus started infecting people in early January, but China didn't start quarantining people until 3 weeks later or so.
I just don't see the math adding up, all it takes is a handful of people not seeking treatment in order for it to start spreading without our knowledge. There has to be thousands of additional cases around the world of that just aren't diagnosed, which is how we're suddenly seeing unexpected diagnoses in places without any previous outbreak like Iran.
No one under 10 has died from it, and only one person under 20. The mortality rate for people under 50 is about .2% (compared to 2.3% for all cases).
So far it's basically a logarithmic function of age.
The lung damage piece is obviously frightening, and we obviously still have a lot to learn about it as we're not sure why children are able to fend it off so easily yet.
You can add other layers and frameworks in addition to using MVC. That doesn't mean MVC is pointless.
>I am typically watchful and quiet, on the periphery of any group.
>I have faked it and been unable to make it
I know other people who moved several times as kids, and these are very common sentiments among them (and many other people as well, who didn't move).
I don't have much else to say, other than you're not alone and I hope you find peace with this.
Celebrities may have a much higher rate of suicide (2.9%) vs the general population (.013% in the US): https://www.researchgate.net/publication/13524696_Suicide_in...
That doesn't seem like the opposite conclusion to me.
I wouldn't be surprised to find out that moving could possibly give you skills, deficiencies, and desires that make it more likely you become an actor either, but that seems like a little more like speculation at this point.
Here's one article [1] that found:
"Elevated risks were observed for all examined outcomes, with excess risk seen among those exposed to multiple versus single relocations in a year. Risks grew incrementally with increasing age of exposure to mobility"
Examined outcomes consisted of "attempted suicide, violent criminality, psychiatric illness, substance misuse, and natural and unnatural deaths."
There are many more studies if you search for them that show a range of affects including worse academic performance and one I found that included a higher rate of hospitalization in kids who moved (although the cause was unclear).
It's a traumatic event.
[1] - https://www.ajpmonline.org/article/S0749-3797(16)30118-0/pdf
[2] - http://theconversation.com/moving-home-can-affect-your-child...
In reality it seems like it was Sony's intention all along to use this as a stepping stone to competing with Nintendo directly anyway.
On the other hand, there's a certain amount of amusement I get from seeing "the cloud" become a marketing buzzword in the mid-late '00's, and now seeing the same thing happen with "serverless."
When you look at the implementation of the two "technologies", they're about 95% the same. Yet somehow they're pitched as these big revolutions.
In another decade when terminals or p2p become popular again we'll be hearing about some new buzzword like "Terran" computing, or "social" architecture or something.
Leave no trace.
Looks like there are extensions in the chrome store that essentially do the same thing though.
Firefox has this feature enabled by default and displays an icon in the address bar that you can click to reload the page in reader mode.
That only holds true if you believe that the two political parties accurately represent the views of the people.
Political views are a spectrum of opinions. Boiling them down to one of two parties means you lose the majority of views. In the end you vote with the party that most closely resembles your opinions, but because the US has two choices, the party you choose doesn't end up representing your beliefs in a lot of cases. It just represents your beliefs more frequently than the other one.
Half of congress is now lead by the executive branch, which completely undermines the checks/balances between them, which is the basis on how the government is supposed to be function. Never mind the judicial branch, which also frequently votes on partisan lines.
Right, that was my point. I wasn't suggesting they invented democracy.
in the US anyway.
But I agree, the US government isn't functioning 1) as originally intended or 2) for the benefit of the majority of the people it 'represents.'
Although it's worth noting that 'as the forefathers intended' carries more weight than it typically should. Their intentions were mostly based on philosophical guess work, as they didn't have a whole lot of empirical data or existing republics/democracies to base their new government on.
It honestly seems like like they intended the US government to function a lot more similarly to the EU than what we currently have. Although the EU has its own sets of problems, but at the very least seems more representative of the people than the US government.
3) this will cause prices to start dropping, which increases uncertainty, and causes additional sells.
4) thus we enter a loop where uncertainty increases, which causes more selling, which causes price decreases, and the market crashes.
Market prices are largely a function of market confidence. If confidence erodes, so does the market. It's how bubbles burst.
Even in the world of software, how many of us have worked on a project for a long time only to hand it off to someone else, and find it hard not to have strong opinions about how they work with it, when it's no longer our responsibility?
My takeaways:
1. If your goal is to try and make money, being focused on one idea at a time is probably better than deep diving in to several narrow niches.
2. I shouldn't be discouraged by not (yet) generating income myself. Despite lots of stories of success and people telling you otherwise, it's a hard thing to do, especially if you work a full time job.
3. I'm really glad I don't bother with the effort of micro tracking my time like this. On the surface it seems appealing but after reading this it seems like it takes a lot of effort, and doesn't provide much value.
They're able to quantify how much of an effect it has on happiness as well.
"Our analysis shows that if you doubled advertising spending, it would result in a 3% drop in life satisfaction. That’s about half the drop in life satisfaction you’d see in a person who had gotten divorced or about one-third the drop you’d see in someone who’d become unemployed."
That's a pretty significant amount, and if confirmed could certainly be used as an argument to regulate advertising, or a way for therapists to help improve the lives of their patients, or in many additional ways I haven't thought of in the 30 seconds I've spent thinking about it.
I wouldn't be so quick to be dismissive of "blatantly obvious" scientific studies.
"Their line is that advertising is trying to expose the public to new and exciting things to buy, and their task is to simply provide information, and in that way they raise human well-being. But the alternative argument, which goes back to Thorstein Veblen and others, is that exposing people to a lot of advertising raises their aspirations—and makes them feel that their own lives, achievements, belongings, and experiences are inadequate. This study supports the negative view, not the positive one."
Because it seems like time and time again someone proposes aliens when in reality it's just some phenomenon or variable we hadn't observed yet.
1) Even on the parts of the autobahn with unrestricted speeds, 130km is still the recommended upper limit, and you're more liable in a collision if you go faster than that.
2) Many people in Germany don't agree with unrestricted speeds, and politicians have compared it to gun law debates in the US.
3) Germany has higher than average deaths per 1000 km driven (for an EU country).