michaelochurch

Why SWEs Can't Have Nice Things

Not that long ago, and not that far away (from San Francisco, as it were) at a
software company, one of those billion-dollar concerns you've heard of, a Vice
President attended a dwarf-tossing-slash-coke orgy on his rival's yacht. He 
couldn't enjoy himself, for that intrusive realization: "This guy's boat's 
twice as big as mine! No wonder I haven't been promoted." So, when he returned
to work, he knew what he needed to do: "free up salary" (fire people) to justify 
a bonus for himself. 

michaelochurch

>>> def dp():
...     r = random.randint(1, 8)
...     if r < 4: return 0
...     if r < 7: return 1
...     if r == 7: return 2
...     if r == 8:
...         out = 3
...         while random.randint(1, 8) == 8:
...             out += 1
...             return out

michaelochurch

IMP      GrIMP    DarkIMP  TRICKER
SCUM     MUCK     OOZE     PINKPUFF
PIRATE   KYZOKU   ROGUE    RAIDER
Frost D  Red D    Blue D   Green D
OGRE     GrOGRE   WzOGRE   ONI
WIZARD   PRIEST   TimeMAGE SAGE
SAHAG    R.SAHAG  SandHAG  WzSAHAG
OCHU     NAOCHU   MORBOL   GrMORBOL
CARIBE   SHARK    R.CARIBE W.SHARK
HYDRA    Red H    Blue H   Green H

michaelochurch

I believe this is correct. Please let me know if there are errors. 

X | - 0 +
---------
- | + 0 -
0 | - 0 +
+ | 0 + -

Call this gate "R". It's universal, assuming we have fan-out (trit-copying) and the constants. That is, a circuit of R's can be built 
to represent any function f: T^n -> T where T = {-, 0, +}.

michaelochurch

ω^ω:
0 < 1 < 2 < 4 < 8 < ... < 3 < 6 < 12 < 24 < ... 9 < 18 < 36 < 72 < ...
  < 5 < 10 < 20 < ... < 15 < 30 < 60 < ... 45 < 90 < 180 < ...
  < 25 < 50 < 100 < ...
  
      < 7 < 14 < 28 < 56 < ...
      
          < 11 < 22 < 44 < 88 < ...
          
... and so on. 

michaelochurch

Name of a character in another writing project. 

michaelochurch

: There is probably a mistake in here...

: Macroexpanded prod in FSB3 with %-comprehensions:

: Keep in mind that [] are *-loops in this language. 

: prod : ... X Y -> ... {(x, y) for x in X, y in Y}
prod:%[{~/~/>~{~/~/~/{%[{~/~/>~{~/~/~/>{~/~/>~~{{~/~/>/{~/~/>/{~/~/~/>{{~/~/>/{~/~/>/{{~/~/>/{~/~/>/~{{~/~/>/{~/~/>/]{~/~/>_]{~/~/>_

Conversion of %-comprehensions:

michaelochurch

Never gonna give you up,
never gonna let you down,
never gonna run around and
desert you.

michaelochurch

In reply to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7031552

*People, as a group, really aren't interested in learning any more than the bare minimum they need to 
get what they want. That's what MOOCs are really up against.*

True, and the people who are motivated tend to rely on each other, if not for support, at least to have
peers who are similarly interested. It's like the fact that people whose friends are obese are more likely
to gain weight. 

If your motivation/work ethic/freedom-from-external-distraction level is 9-10, then you're fine working

michaelochurch

Real estate (like oil in the short term, cf. "oil shocks" of the 1970s) is extremely supply-inelastic, 
such that a 1% loss of supply might cause prices to go up *a lot* more than 1%-- possibly 10%, 20%, 
even 2x. The result of this is that a destruction of real estate supply will actually increase the 
*total* market value: a cataclysmic loss of 5% of NYC's real estate would drive prices through the roof 
and make the price level look "healthy" (from the buyer-centric perspective common in the US when it 
comes to housing). But no value was created! Much was destroyed. 

The 2000s run-up in NYC's housing costs was driven largely by speculation after 9/11. While we 
*actually* had 12+ subsequent years with no major domestic terror attacks, there were a large number of 
(esp. foreign) speculators who expected future attacks in major cities and bought lots of RE in