waqf

It's worse than that. You need the median time for the whole project, which you can't get just from summing the medians of the individual tasks.

Transposing is effortless on most modern keyboard instruments: you press the transpose button. Now you have a choice of what key it sounds in and a choice of what fingering you find convenient.

Isn't that better than your suggestion, where you're locked into one fingering?

That was my first reaction too, but on reflection I think the cases are distinguishable. I do say the words "I agree with <Bob>" in meetings, but only when I am acknowledging (and thereby unintentionally endorsing) that there's a difference of opinion. Usually the subject of the difference is already on the table and doesn't need to be spelled out.

By contrast, when I am crediting an idea it's because I had to reintroduce it when it seems to have been dropped; it's not the current subject of discussion. So I say something like "I liked <Bob>'s idea from earlier, to <frobnicate all the bangwoozles with imaginary polarity>".

As a piano player, let's figure out the best way to arrange the keys on the keyboard first, and figure out the names afterwards.

And yet (depending on how it is used) "oversight" often refers to an instance of overlooking, rather than of overseeing.

It seems remiss of Grammarist to write an entire page without mentioning that.

> 'the second draft is where you make it look like you knew what you were doing the whole time'

That's why I qualified with "even during the later stages". It seemed to me that OP implied that the book would be completely finalised for publication without the author having gained the required perspective on their ideas. And that would surely defeat the object, since their insight wouldn't make it into the book; otherwise, I agree with your point.

> Writing the one pager forces the author to condense the book. Discussing it honed his thoughts.

I find this observation shocking, because it forces me to confront the idea that the author didn't already have a concise explanation of the book in their head, even during the later stages of finishing and editing the book.

Am I unreasonable to feel that I'm probably not interested in reading a book created by someone who didn't have any overall perspective on what they were doing?

Serious question, what should I consider before moving to Serbia and buying an apartment for $40k?

Specifically, only on "independent local" news sites. I have to wonder if they, or the entity who operates the website on their behalf, all belong to the same multinational. Like the "independent local" TV stations that are all owned by Sinclair Broadcast Group.

I can't think of any other reason that so many local news sites would be affected, and so few other sites.

The thing is, a lot of this stuff happened in Europe too, at least qualitatively. Train operators were already unprofitable after WWI and were nationalized, and after WWII, funding and infrastructure were lacking and cars were seen as flexible, democratic and increasingly cheap. For example in the UK the famous name is the Beeching Axe (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_Axe).

I'd be very interested to see a comparative study of the US and Western (and Eastern) European countries' transport infrastructure in this period, but I've never found one.

But in actual intellectual discourse, if someone presents a point of view which is founded on a discredited idea, then we just ignore them. We do not show up at their talks and try to prevent them from communicating with others.

Firstly because life's too short for that, and secondly because who knows, one day they might turn out to have been right or mostly right.

Conditional subsidies ("we'll give you money if you don't build that nasty coal plant") do capture an externality, so I'm not sure what point you're making.

That seems like obviously the wrong question, since it has at least the potential to rule out viable solutions a priori.

For example, what would be wrong with preventing developing nations from cheaply industrialising, while also subsidising them to do something else instead?

You have 500 people and you spend 20k/month to employ each of them.

That's why many public lotteries use a live (televised) draw from a mechanical lottery machine. Still not completely physically impossible to rig, of course, but much more transparent than a software RNG.

I don't think anyone's yet written an RFC for IP over viral DNA … you can be the first!

Also "Web" by John Wyndham.

If this law will solve your problems then I … guess your code doesn't have to work outside the US?

He's talking about the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robertson–Seymour_theorem.

We can do better than "at least sounds reasonable". Wiktionary is a detailed source for etymology (albeit not itself sourced): https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/let#Etymology_2

Excellent justification for a business model right here: "And students are already accustomed to [being screwed over]."

Aren't small-claims courts precisely an attempt to optimize for a low-overhead justice system in the small? Doubtless you feel they don't succeed or don't go far enough, but it seems odd to claim that nobody's tried.

I don't just want to see the top 5 countries, I want to see every country for which you have data. Why are they greyed out?

I thought someone would say that :), that's a combinatorial optimization that happens to work in the exact scenario I described, and assuming no further constraints.

But you lose out if you instead want to do 2 years on 2 years off, or if your one-year employer doesn't want you to work July to June, or if your year-off plans don't work July to June, or any number of more complicated scenarios. My point stands that the system isn't designed to support this kind of irregular high-income work.

What the tax system doesn't respect is that my life might be better and more productive if I spent a year earning 200,000 and then took a year off, then if I worked a 100,000/year job the entire time.

> never felt as little intellectual freedom

What are the other things you have done, in which you have felt more intellectual freedom?

> stochastic kabuki

I love this description of academic politics, thank you.

GP didn't say that a bubble is expecting the price of something to rise, they said that a bubble is expecting the price of something with negative fundamental returns to rise.

And yet if you announced to a general audience of programmers that you had a marvellous new programming language that guarantees performance but doesn't guarantee correctness, you'd be laughed out of the room.

Also it impacts cursor editing (for example using vi) more than just typing text, for the same reason.

Gorgons have snakes growing from their hair and presumably that's what's being referred to (though I agree that the author of the quote is probably confused).

But "the medusa" is also an error at another level, because one should write either "Medusa" or "the gorgon". Medusa was the name of a specific gorgon.