eurg

• eurgFeb 16, 2013, 11:03 AM

  0 points

  in reply to: James_Miller’s comment on: What are your rules of thumb?

  Also, if you want to pick up such a signal, it is helpful that you are not totally overworked or tired, and also not under the influence of a significant amount of disinhibiting substances.

• eurgFeb 12, 2013, 10:48 AM

  22 points

  in reply to: MixedNuts’s comment on: Is suicide high-sta­tus?

  “What else is there to explain?”

  After about 0.5 seconds of thought, I might become interested whether suicide after status-loss has a different frequency in different cultures, and if yes, whether this difference can be explained in the respective way of handling the death of the person. The simple emotional question behind that is whether in all cultures suicides after a status-hit are more strongly motivated by the pain of the status-loss itself, or also by the expected development after death. I might even be interested in whether this question makes sense at all. Still, it remains something to be explained.

  Also, “What else is there to explain?” sounds suspiciously like “Are you so stupid to not see that?”.

• eurgFeb 8, 2013, 4:12 PM

  1 point

  in reply to: JGWeissman’s comment on: Hav­ing Trou­ble Posting

  I cannot fathom how this comment can be so downvoted. Snarky remarks do hurt, and pointing that out is necessary. Placing the duty to be charitable on the receiver is one of the primary failure modes of communication. I do understand that both LW and programmers draw an above average amount of their demographics from non-NT people, but rejecting the reality of emotions in the majority (even in the programmers group) will not improve anyone’s experiences.

• eurgJan 19, 2013, 7:58 PM

  0 points

  on: Meet up in­ter­est: Vienna, March

  If the meet up would happen on a weekend, and be easily accessible with public transport, I’d visit.

• eurgJan 19, 2013, 9:53 AM

  0 points

  in reply to: Baughn’s comment on: My sim­ple hack for in­creased alert­ness and im­proved cog­ni­tive func­tion­ing: very bright light

  Also, if you buy RGB(W) LEDs and add some work, you can choose your rooms color temperature at will. Keep it at 6k if you want to work, let it shift gently to 2k3 to help with a regular sleep rhythm, make it turquoise for a party...

• eurgJan 19, 2013, 9:47 AM

  6 points

  in reply to: Kaj_Sotala’s comment on: My sim­ple hack for in­creased alert­ness and im­proved cog­ni­tive func­tion­ing: very bright light

  Depends on how the bulb is build. The important factors are

  • light temperature: color tone; the temperature at which we would perceive a black body radiator to be of the same color

  • color rendition index: how good its light spectrum is compared to a black body, meaning if it doesn’t miss any frequencies which we would perceive; incandescent bulbs have 100, good LEDs about 90, and currently average at 80 for living room LED bulbs

  • lumen/​watt: efficiency as in perceived brightness per watt; not efficiency as in electric energy → photons conversion

  Most old-style incandescent bulbs have a simple build, and higher watt bulbs usually have a higher color temperature, and somewhat better efficiency. So, 4 60W would be severly different from 1 240W (such bulbs have been sold in the past, though not anymore; people prefer halogen for that now, because higher temperature incandescent bulbs usually have a much shorter life).

  Halogen bulbs (I am always talking “quarz halogen” here; without Wikipedia I wouldn’t have known others exist) are usually build for a specific temperature, and then you buy the wattage/​brightness in lumen you want (where I live practically all halogen bulbs come in 2900 +/​- 200 K); so you buy spot with 2900K, and have available everything from 10W to 40W, or a 300W “stick”, again with 2900 K. Higher color temperature are available, but usually not at your first supermarket. BTW, you get around 4900 lumen for a 240W halogen stick.

  With LEDs and CFLs everything gets fucking crazy. Whatever color temperature you prefer, don’t get below a CRI of 85. It makes pictures look crazy, and after a while you want to rip out your eyes. 90 is really good, for professional photo work only 100 is 100.

  Another guide for room lighting (personal experience): 2 klm at 20m² is just a bit more than cozy, 5 klm per 20m² are good enough (you can read, learn, work), but not office style. If the OP means “small room” at about 15 m², he should have the equivalent of 12 klm at 20m², which sounds about right for “feels brighter than winter outside”, but it would not be (at 47 degrees north, that is).

  Although having real bright light matters, to feel brighter you might want to make contrast. Your eyes/​brain tell you “less bright” if everything has the same luminosity (that is the reason why on a cloudy day it feels darker on the outside than in your apartment, but as soon as you take a photograph you recognize it isn’t). So: Get a dark spot somewhere.

• eurgJan 19, 2013, 9:01 AM

  1 point

  in reply to: prase’s comment on: My sim­ple hack for in­creased alert­ness and im­proved cog­ni­tive func­tion­ing: very bright light

  Well, I thought Kawoomba knew it better than me, and it would be a u-declination (africanus, -u). But no, according to the English Wictionary entry on africanus, it is a/​o. So, africanam. Though the last time when I was learning latin was eight years ago, so...

  (edit) When we are at it, what’s it in Lojban?

• eurgJan 13, 2013, 5:08 PM

  8 points

  in reply to: David_Gerard’s comment on: Farewell Aaron Swartz (1986-2013)

  Too optimistic.

• eurgJan 13, 2013, 11:34 AM

  2 points

  in reply to: PECOS-9’s comment on: Farewell Aaron Swartz (1986-2013)

  It seems I am too incompetent to make myself understood.

• eurgDec 27, 2012, 5:44 PM

  0 points

  in reply to: [deleted]’s comment on: New cen­sor­ship: against hy­po­thet­i­cal vi­o­lence against iden­ti­fi­able people

  Luckily enough, that blog seems much better than your introduction of it. My troll accusation is founded on your highly repetitive deliberate misunderstanding of the OP. It must be deliberate, as you are usually much smarter than that, and also better in style.

  Also, Sister Y is not pro-suicide per se, but against anti-suicide positions; at least that’s how I read it.

• eurgDec 24, 2012, 4:25 PM

  0 points

  in reply to: [deleted]’s comment on: New cen­sor­ship: against hy­po­thet­i­cal vi­o­lence against iden­ti­fi­able people

  Forget about it.

• eurgNov 5, 2012, 2:21 PM

  0 points

  in reply to: IlyaShpitser’s comment on: Causal Di­a­grams and Causal Models

  Thanks for clarifying!

• eurgOct 20, 2012, 10:55 PM

  2 points

  in reply to: IlyaShpitser’s comment on: Causal Di­a­grams and Causal Models

  Is this another variation of the theme that one needs to assume the possibility of inductive reasoning to make an argument for it (or also assume Occam’s Razor to argue for it)? Also, the specific example he gave seems to me like an instance of “given very skewed data, the best guesses are still wrong” (there was sometime a variation of that here, regarding bets and opponents who have superior information). Or are you thinking of something for subtle?

• eurgOct 10, 2012, 6:10 PM

  4 points

  in reply to: A1987dM’s comment on: Fire­wal­ling the Op­ti­mal from the Rational

  If “anything like that” includes reciting prayers, practically all catholic private schools in Europe will count.

• eurgOct 10, 2012, 5:29 PM

  6 points

  in reply to: AlexMennen’s comment on: Fire­wal­ling the Op­ti­mal from the Rational

  Through use of the “seq_epistemology” tag this is possible via the “Article Navigation”. Maybe this tag was only added after the comment? However, it works quite well!

• eurgOct 5, 2012, 2:28 PM

  −2 points

  in reply to: tut’s comment on: “Hide com­ments in down­voted threads” is now active

  • unnecessary link and opinion retracted -

• eurgSep 21, 2012, 8:07 PM

  0 points

  in reply to: CCC’s comment on: Less Wrong Polls in Comments

  Which is too bad, as all incorrect options should have the same rights (for moral reasons).

• eurgSep 17, 2012, 11:09 PM

  0 points

  in reply to: [deleted]’s comment on: Open Thread, Septem­ber 15-30, 2012

  Thanks for digging that up! Also, I did not want to imply that only silly things are measured, but rather that the most interesting questions are still unanswered due to various constraints.

• eurgSep 17, 2012, 12:28 PM

  10 points

  in reply to: James_Miller’s comment on: Open Thread, Septem­ber 15-30, 2012

  I am a software developer, and have glimpsed over many similar questions. To summarize: There are enormous individual differences in how one can become a better programmer, and even more so on the opinions on it. It is not even easy to agree on what basic skills should be there at the “end” (i.e., the beginning, after your first two years real experience), much less on how to get those skills.

  That said, most commonplace advice is valid here:

  • there is with high probability no really significant innate aptitude for programming (intelligence has a carry-over into many domains, however) (edit: seems I am wrong about that: See “Has “Not everyone can be a programmer” been studied?” at Programmers.StackExchange

  • don’t expect too much skill carry-over: mathematical thinking and programming are related, but different activities

  • being able to concentrate for some time is good (a.k.a.: conscientiousness helps)

  • as a kid, liking the task probably also helps

  • playing the trumpet—not that much (though it can be fun)

  On skill-set:

  • The practical coding skills are always important. (Except if you want to earn more than a dev.)

  • Algorithmic knowledge is rarely helpful, but you will stumble at least once if you don’t have it (but nobody will notice).

  • Mathematics is necessary only in very small areas.

  What should I have done? Training self-discipline would have helped (if something like that is possible). Knowing/​Having somebody who is actually significantly better than me, and pushing me, would have helped (fuckarounditis on “learning” is too easy to do).

  My Opinion: In professional software development there is very little time to broaden your knowledge—it goes into obscure platform and domain knowledge quite quickly, and Jobs where you do what is actually interesting are in very short supply. However, exactly this broader knowledge is what can keep you afloat even if you happen to be neurotic, unreliable, slow worker*. So: Let him do what is most interesting, but gently guide him to do it just a bit better, and a little bit more diverse than he would otherwise. About interest: Many people say kids usually like somewhat quick results, and things that crawl. Maybe?

  Preparatory learning exercises: Sorry, no opinion and idea here. I always liked to take things apart, and sometimes also to put them together (as in Lego Technik models, or—almost always unsuccessful—attempts to construct my own). Actually, I think constructing Lego models (or of course anything that is “more real”) is great. But then there is the initial caveat of individual differences.

  *: I might exaggerate a bit, but not too much.

• eurg 17 Sep 2012 11:49 UTC

  0 points

  in reply to: Jayson_Virissimo’s comment on: Open Thread, Septem­ber 15-30, 2012

  Is this really so strange?

  No, but context and wording is sometimes everything. I assume that datadataeverywhere has imported some HN style startup discussion context here.