Stack Exchange
log in

Yakk

 Discussion on answer by Monty Wild: W…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Yakk
Mar 6 01:12
@Seallussus I'm still unclear. Are you posting merely to "have the last word", or is there content? If no content, don't post.
Yakk
Mar 6 01:12
@Seallussus No, not a chat. Please continue.
Yakk
Mar 6 01:12
@Seallussus I'm sorry, do you have something to say? I'm still unclear. Are these comments supposed to be saying something? If so, please continue.
Yakk
Mar 6 01:12
@Seallussus I mean, you started making claims in comments; when someone points out issues with your claims, you presume bad faith and take your ball home? You might want to touch grass.
Yakk
Mar 6 01:12
@Seallussus I am just citing that 1000-3000 year old records have "you are now an adult" milestones that are in the 16-21 year range, which is quite similar to today. As this is also the point where people become physically mature, it makes a lot of sense. Some periods the ages got lower. When the US constitution was written, you had to be significantly older to hold some offices. So, I'm not seeing a huge divergence; today you can be recruited as a child soldier at age 12 in some areas.
Yakk
Mar 6 01:12
@Seallussus Ancient greece, from which we have records, had male children becoming "mature" at age 18, at which point they could to two years of military service to become full adult citizens. This isn't far off modern day numbers. Similarly, we have age 12 apprentices serving a 7 year apprenticeship in the middle ages, knights being knighted at 21, rome let boys join the military at 16... The existence of child-brides nonwithstanding, everyone knew the teenagers where not real adults.
 

 Discussion on answer by Avery: Did Wi…

Imported from a comment discussion on skeptics.stackexchange.c...
Yakk
Jan 17 11:28
@Kevin So, the fact that SE asia has a lot of money but little donations to Wikipedia is actually an example of seeing an untapped market. To tap an untapped market, the first step is often to find out what you are missing and provide services that untapped market would want. Only after you have provided the key services would you expect a revenue stream to appear. Thus, improving SE language and historical information could easily be viewed in this light. For Africa, there is a lot less money to be chased; but in the medium term (20 years) this could change.
 

 Discussion on question by Steve: Why …

Imported from a comment discussion on langdev.stackexchange.co...
Yakk
Dec 19, 2024 12:12
@Steve It was used for multiple different and unrelated purposes because people writing SQL where just bashing things together and picked something that sort of made sense. Treating quirky language choices as "very good design reasons" is language-hubris! More importantly, because NULL has no coherent meaning, extending the meaning of NULL to more cases than the eclectic mix of features SQL has has no coherent solution. How should NULL be handled when passed to an operation SQL lacks? You get to make it up, like the designers of SQL did at the time, and you'll get quirks.
Yakk
Dec 19, 2024 12:12
Computer science professor Ron van der Meyden summarized the various issues as: "The inconsistencies in the SQL standard mean that it is not possible to ascribe any intuitive logical semantics to the treatment of nulls in SQL."
 

 Discussion on answer by Aadiraj Anil:…

Imported from a comment discussion on aviation.stackexchange.c...
Yakk
Sep 3, 2024 07:34
@Michael The main rotor applies a torque to the helicopter. This is countered by the rear rotor, which also provides a different torque along its axis of rotation. If you want to rotate one way, you spin up the rear rotor; rotate the other way you slow it down. Spin up the main rotor and one direction of rotation is easier than the other. Spinning up the rear rotor cause the entire helicopter to pitch forward... or back, depending on which way it spins. If you lose power, the helicopter will start rotating one way or the other. I'm not sure how magic you think helicopter controls are...
 

 Discussion on answer by AlexP: A worl…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Yakk
May 8, 2024 14:48
@Oddthinking Ignore the coin value then - make the contract be for a specific weight of silver, or a punitively larger amount of coin (so much that you don't care if they give you 3p coins) such that they are going to pay in silver. Include a clause allowing you to clear the debt if you choose to, and accept specific coins whose value you agree matches the silver in practice. The point is you can write contracts that work around it. The counterparty knows the REAL debt - the weight of silver - so feels secure. You avoid payment in worthless coins.
Yakk
May 8, 2024 14:48
@Oddthinking Then I write the exact form the debt needs to be cleared in. If I can't use "coin units" because of the law which forces me to take 3p coins, I rephrase the debt to be "silver weight equivalent to ZZZ", where ZZZ happens to describe the coins I want to take (but not the 3p coins, which aren't made of silver).
 

 Discussion on answer by Christopher J…

Imported from a comment discussion on space.stackexchange.com/...
Yakk
Jan 19, 2024 13:22
@Dragongeek Yes, he uses a laser-lift system with 2% power transfer efficiency, and it lifts it to geostationary orbit. That is 75 MJ/kg. At 3 cents per MJ and 50% of amount lifted isn't payload, we hit 225$. That 2% power transfer efficiency uses y2k era solar cells and y2k era lasers; the paper mentions that much more efficient lasers will shortly exist, and solar cells have easily doubled in efficiency since then.
Yakk
Jan 19, 2024 13:22
@ChristopherJamesHuff Rocket engines are extremely inefficient at turning chemical energy into motion above ground level, because they first have to physically lift the chemicals to the height you want the motion at. I'm reading the Edwards document, and it appears using already-existing lasers with 3% efficiency and not the 30% proposed efficiency design is why it has a 2% overall efficiency - the distance problem is solved by adaptive optics.
 

 Discussion between causative and Yakk

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Yakk
Dec 4, 2023 03:42
The main delta-v cost is safely landing in gravity wells, or exiting them.
Yakk
Dec 4, 2023 03:42
@causative Mining 1 billion tonnes of ores doesn't require anywhere near 1 billion tonnes of supplies. Delta-v (insofar as it matters) is in favour of shipping refined goods.
Yakk
Dec 4, 2023 03:42
@causative Crashing asteroids of reasonable size into planets doesn't result in a mining site - it results in a destroyed planetary surface. We are talking larger than dinosaur killer asteroids. And moving an entire asteroid is strictly more expensive than moving the mined output, so you don't even save on the rocket fuel you seem to think is super expensive (??). (rocket fuel is energy plus mass; you'd use slag as propellant). Energy budgets to move around the solar system are as low as you want them to be, the only problem is time. Rockets are only expensive when they are fast.
Yakk
Dec 4, 2023 03:42
@causative Except resource extraction on Earth is insanely expensive. Cheap transportation -- to where? To where the resources come from, or where the processed resources come from. We have single asteroids with more metals than we can ever mine on the planet Earth, because the Earth's crust is insanely metal-light compared to asteroids (the metals on earth are trapped in the core). And planets are expensive to ship to/from where the cheap resources are... so their shipping is expensive. Once we have space industry, planets become backwaters.
Yakk
Dec 4, 2023 03:42
@causative If you have left a planet (including to get to another planet), you had to have functioning space industry. And once you have functioning space industry, stuff on planets is ridiculously expensive to get to the industry (and somewhat expensive to deliver goods to as well). Planets become backwaters. Delivering stuff fast by rocket is expensive, but slow deliveries aren't expensive (stuff a solar sail on it, or ion drive powered by solar panels shooting asteroid dust, or whatever): delivering terraatonnes of iron to a forge is cheaper.
 

 Discussion on answer by Wolfgang Bang…

Imported from a comment discussion on academia.stackexchange.c...
Yakk
Dec 1, 2023 22:42
@Dawn Sure, but consulting is the business of selling prestige and excuses; they can use degree letters on consultants to make their smoke job smell better.
 

 Discussion on answer by Brian Z: Is n…

Imported from a comment discussion on philosophy.stackexchange...
Yakk
Aug 28, 2023 21:27
@DikranMarsupial I said higher level of certainty, not certainty. "I saw an image of a divine being" leads to lower level of certainty than what I described, not certainty. Despite Oliver Manuel's neutron star core theory, the level of certainty that the sun is a hydrogen fusion plasma ball is still pretty damn high. The level of certainty that you aren't hallucinating when god shows up and has a chat with you in your garage is going to be much lower. I will leave it to you to pick where "Australia exists" is in your spectrum of certainty; but there are plenty of people who disbelieve that.
Yakk
Aug 28, 2023 21:27
@DikranMarsupial Sure, but now replace a single visitation with an image of god appearing every morning at 9 am, speaking to the entire planet, producing knowledge beyond our understanding, and leaving every evening. What more, this god being amenable to being experimented with and alternative hypothesis are brought up and all rejected (aliens faking it, etc) through pretty strong evidence. This is the level of evidence we have that the sun is a fusion powered ball of plasma that exists, and it is pretty high.
 

 Discussion on answer by Robert Rapple…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Yakk
Aug 5, 2023 20:50
@cmaster-reinstatemonica Signals on wire travel at about 0.02% of the speed of light, 5000x slower than light. 1 GHz is 30 cm at the speed of light, or 1.5 km at the speed electrical signals go down wires. NTP is admittedly only 1 ms accurate over a LAN, so closer to 60 meters of signal wire. But we can do better than NTP.
Yakk
Aug 5, 2023 20:50
@cmaster-reinstatemonica Sure, but my goal is that each of the ignitions occurs at the same time at multiple spots. You know, to make it more sudden.
Yakk
Aug 5, 2023 20:50
I mean, synchronizing a bunch of computer clocks to be within a tiny fraction of a second of each other isn't hard. Just use NTP! If you can pull off 10^-6 second accuracy on the clocks+detonators, such network computer+detonator triggered explosions would improve explosion timing if set more than 1 cm apart (ie, it'll be fast enough).
 

 Discussion on answer by ohwilleke: To…

Imported from a comment discussion on politics.stackexchange.c...
Yakk
Jul 28, 2023 05:53
I note no expendatures graphs here. While taxes seem like it should be more real, the percent of the total economy the government directs determines the average amount of money that people earn that can be directed by individuals.
 

 Discussion on answer by user6726: Whe…

Imported from a comment discussion on law.stackexchange.com/qu...
Yakk
Jul 18, 2023 15:20
@Jen I am not discussing in the comments, I am making a suggestion to improve the question. You then discussed... not even my suggestion, but my posting of a comment, which isn't something you should do in comments.
Yakk
Jul 18, 2023 15:19
@Jen Your comment does not match a valid "purpose of comments", don't make it as a comment, do it in chat. My comment directly suggests an improvement to the question, which is explicitly allowed under "purpose of comments".
 

 Discussion on question by gwcoffey: W…

Imported from a comment discussion on money.stackexchange.com/...
Yakk
Jun 30, 2023 13:55
Don't lend money to a family or friends that you aren't prepared to (a) gift them, or (b) end the relationship over and go to court and still probably not get it back..
 

 Discussion on answer by John O: How w…

Imported from a comment discussion on worldbuilding.stackexcha...
Yakk
Jun 23, 2023 09:23
Added a citation about sensory processing issues that people with cochlear implants have. Feel free to add your own editorials on it, but I thought it improved the answer.
Yakk
Jun 23, 2023 09:23
Describing the problems people whose hearing is seriously augmented later in life as "generally social" is pretty darn dismissive; and it is a throw away line without citation or basis.
 

 Discussion on answer by Dale M: Can a…

Imported from a comment discussion on law.stackexchange.com/qu...
Yakk
May 19, 2023 19:44
"When you train your AI, you will need to make a copy of the image. Do you have permission? Do you have a relevant exemption?" So I have copyright over the text I'm typing here, as I am a human authoring text. Do you have permission to make a copy of this text? In order to display this text in your browser your computer will have to make a copy of the text and display a copy on your screen. Does my posting of this text give you implicit permission to make a copy? Does the copy on your screen "not count"?
 

 Discussion on question by adkane: Do …

Imported from a comment discussion on philosophy.stackexchange...
Yakk
May 17, 2023 19:11
@adkane There was one use of logic; the proof that the intermediate value theorem held in constructive analysis. I was initially capable of doing that proof without understanding it: I did logic, without understanding. Later, I understood it. This is because the process of checking logical symbols and their validity as a proof is mechanical and does not need understanding. It wasn't "copying", it was remapping one proof to another (the proof rules are different in the two cases, but they are similar). Even that process can be done mechanically (without understanding).
Yakk
May 17, 2023 19:11
@adkane Why do you think logic requires understanding? Your use of logic may require understanding; but I can have done logic in a mechanical way without understanding my manipulations and get results I find surprising, and have to spend significant effort understanding my chain of logic after I already did it. As a concrete example, I was able to 1:1 mirror a classical proof to prove a constructive intermediate value theorem, but understanding what I did and why it works and the essential difference was a separate step. I did logic without understanding it, then understood it.
 

 Discussion on answer by Frank: The lo…

Imported from a comment discussion on philosophy.stackexchange...
Yakk
Mar 31, 2023 22:17
@JD The space V of continuous functions from R (real numbers) to R with the obvious + and scalar multiplication is a vector space. The vector objects f from V are not "two points". While this may not line up with your meaning of vector, it is the meaning being used here. Now, the space of continuous functions is far richer than the trivial vector space we are using here. But it is quite well defined, and no it doesn't need "two points".
Yakk
Mar 31, 2023 22:17
@JD No; a mathematical vector space is an abstraction (generalization) of what you are thinking of. {0} with the trivial operations + and * is a valid vector space: (0+0) is 0, and (0*x) is 0 for all x. It may not be an interesting vector space, but it is a vector space. My definition of a vector (which is the standard mathematicians definition) does not require two points. It might be boring, but some mathematical objects are both boring and useful.
Yakk
Mar 31, 2023 22:17
@JD 1. No, vectors in a vector space don't require points, let alone 2 of them. The ones in your head might, but that is your problem, not the vectors problem. 2. No, generalizations of things don't have the properties of the thing they generalize. Affine spaces don't have all of the properties of Euclidean spaces. If they did, we'd call them Euclidean spaces. So "Euclidean spaces have property X" is an irrelevant argument. "It is not possible, by definition" - I mean, now you are arguing someone else is wrong based on your own personal choice of definitions.
 

 Discussion on question by as12345: Fo…

Imported from a comment discussion on travel.stackexchange.com...
Yakk
Mar 10, 2023 18:58
Naw, like I said, just tax imports from VAT countries by their government refunds. Easy and fair.
Yakk
Mar 10, 2023 15:26
But, what this means is you shouldn't engage in free trade with a VAT regime without your own trade barriers (export subsidies and import tariffs) or you'll be screwed.
Yakk
Mar 10, 2023 15:26
@Relaxed You can have standard taxation that is regressive or not. The point is, standard taxation taxes economic activity. VAT explicitly does not due to its included import tariff and export refund. Compare roads with a use-tax to roads funded by VAT; in both cases, they are infrastructure that benefits production, but in the VAT one case the produced and exported goods don't pay for the benefit (unless, again, you add in an export subsidy).
Yakk
Mar 10, 2023 03:36
Why VAT justifies import tariffs and export subsidies, while being an otherwise insanely regressive tax, is a bit of a puzzle. I suppose WTO rules get written for the benefit of the rich in general, which would solve the puzzle.
Yakk
Mar 10, 2023 03:34
Taxing land (property taxes) + import tariff + export subsidty? Acts like VAT. The extra cost of production because land costs more.
Yakk
Mar 10, 2023 03:34
I mean, taxing roads + import tariff + export subsidy? Acts like VAT.
Yakk
Mar 10, 2023 03:33
How exactly the money gets into the governments coffers isn't very relevant; but VAT adds in taxation of the value added in another country, and then removes all taxation from the value added in the country of production and taxation. Economically, it is just bog standard taxation, plus a trade barrier. I'm not sure why this description bothers you.
Yakk
Mar 10, 2023 03:31
I then discovered that it acts as an export subsidy and extra import tax compared to other means of taxation. Problem solved.
Yakk
Mar 10, 2023 03:31
@Relaxed I'm aware how VAT works. I was puzzled initially why such a regressive tax was considered a good idea.
Yakk
Mar 8, 2023 23:05
@Relaxed Suppose you have two countries. Both tax 25% of GDP. One taxes income and profits at 25%, subsidizes all exports by 20%, and taxes all imports at 25%, the other has a 25% VAT, rebates the VAT on export, and taxes all imports with a 25% VAT. These two countries **have the same tax structure**.

Hence VAT is equivalent to traditional "economic activity" taxes (production taxes), plus an export subsidy and import tariff. They are also extremely regressive.
Yakk
Mar 7, 2023 16:47
@Relaxed ... it just is designed to not look like one, avoiding WTO rules.
Yakk
Mar 7, 2023 16:47
@Relaxed Goods produced in Europe are taxed, that tax is refunded on export. On import, goods produced elsewhere are taxed. This tax displaces production taxes, like income taxes and the like. Another country that taxes at the point of production gets their goods double-taxed (once at production, and again VAT). European goods with reduced production taxes (in comparison to services) are not VAT taxed, nor taxed by the destination. To fix this you'd have to add export subsidies by the production-tax country and tariffs on imports from Europe. Hence, VAT is functionally a tariff+subsidy.
Yakk
Mar 7, 2023 16:47
@DanubianSailor VAT is a form of tariff; by moving taxation from production to consumption and taxing incoming goods, it acts like a trade barrier against countries that do production taxes and/or are not part of the VAT agreement. It is definitely aimed directly at people importing goods for personal consumption. But it does so while pretending it isn't a tariff. Once you get that, "why should I owe VAT" starts making sense. (This also explains why VAT on exports is refunded)