Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Suppose I Wanted to Kill a Lot of Pilots (2020)

newsletter.butwhatfor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 130 posts

Re: Suppose I Wanted to Kill a Lot of Pilots (2020)

#41

Post by busterarm »

dymk wrote: post #28
hindsightbias wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we’re going to need people to populate austere environments lile Mars, we’re going to need people used to living without windows. Works for the Navy.

This is housing for undergrads on sunny coastal California, not the navy

We're always just one declared war away from changing that.

Your life's circumstances can change at a moment's notice. You could fall and have a devastating brain injury. Being comfortable with your circumstances can mostly only come from within.

Re: Suppose I Wanted to Kill a Lot of Pilots (2020)

#42

Post by named-user »

bsaul wrote: post #8
jerf wrote: post #2

A lot of "security mindset" comes from this principle as well. In theory, you should have strong barriers everywhere, but we're not to that level of maturity yet. (I still hope to see some successful implementation of "capabilities" like in E or something before my career is over. That's an example of what I'm thinking of as maturity.) In practice you get a long way just by writing some code down, and then thinking H…

In my experience, TDD has a bit of a similar effect on your perception on a problem. By first designing the test that would make the code fail, then making sure it fails, then create the code to have the test pass, you kind of change the way you think about the original problem, and it sometimes helps.

Unit tests only catch known failure modes.

TDD only catches assumed known failure modes.

Re: Suppose I Wanted to Kill a Lot of Pilots (2020)

#43

Post by hprotagonist »

queuebert wrote: post #30
hprotagonist wrote: post #6

TRIZ practitioners quickly realized that the root cause of some problems cannot easily be identified, which makes a frontal assault on them impossible. This kind of problem is solved with TRIZ’s Anticipatory Failure Determination mental model — rather than solving for success, solve for failure. This is pretty darn close to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophatic_theology : I can't tell you what The Good Thing is, bu…

Isn't this just the scientific method? Disproving a hypothesis is much easier than proving one.

Arguably you can only refute hypotheses, if you're of the empiricist mindset about testability, so in a sense that's even _more_ stringent.

TRIZ seems to admit of situations where basically, you don't know enough about what your hypothesis ought to be that 'the scientific method' won't get you far enough, so you must proceed by walling off as much of your search space as possible as fast as possible by prioritizing the rejection of negative outcomes rather than identification of positive ones.

Re: Suppose I Wanted to Kill a Lot of Pilots (2020)

#44

Post by rtkwe »

nisegami wrote: post #23
adewinter wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The building has not yet been built.

This is not his first time designing dorms: https://housing.umich.edu/residence-hall/munger/

The difference between Munger Hall [2] and the new UCSB dorm [1] is vast. For starters you go from a 7 person common room being your nearest real light to a 60-70 person common room being your nearest indoor natural light. The Michigan dorm has a fraction of the people living in it total, larger rooms and amenities that would be hard to include in the UCSB simply because there's so many more people in that doom.

You expect a quality difference between graduate apartments and undergraduate dorms but saying one is well received (with complaints about the lack of windows and lights in the bedrooms btw) so this different design must also be secretly ok is stretching things.

[1] https://static.dezeen.com/uploads/2021/11/munger-hall-univer... [2] https://i.redd.it/81yfb7wkxby51.jpg

Re: Suppose I Wanted to Kill a Lot of Pilots (2020)

#45

Post by busterarm »

mattnewton wrote: post #38
hindsightbias wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we’re going to need people to populate austere environments lile Mars, we’re going to need people used to living without windows. Works for the Navy.

The navy pays people to live like that; the university is charging people. Not sure this is comparable.

If the education were worth a damn, people would be climbing over each other to get into those dorms.

The juice not being worth the squeeze is not the dorms' fault.

Re: Suppose I Wanted to Kill a Lot of Pilots (2020)

#46

Post by OneTimePetes »

xyzelement wrote: post #40
g_sch wrote: post #12

It took a second for me to make this connection, but the Charlie Munger in this article is the same Charlie Munger who designed that windowless dorm at UCSB that made the news a few days back. [0] I wonder if he applied the same principles to designing that building. [0] https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-...

From what I see in responses to you, Munger has designed other well-received dorms in the past so that gives him credibility on this topic. It doesn't mean he's right but it's a good chance his thinking is more nuanced than those shitting on it - especially coupled with the current article that describes how he thinks. This is total conjecture but I can imagine him doing something like this: Question: how do you make…

And all the stoner gamer students with the blinds down cheered.

Re: Suppose I Wanted to Kill a Lot of Pilots (2020)

#47

Post by jquery »

xyzelement wrote: post #40
g_sch wrote: post #12

It took a second for me to make this connection, but the Charlie Munger in this article is the same Charlie Munger who designed that windowless dorm at UCSB that made the news a few days back. [0] I wonder if he applied the same principles to designing that building. [0] https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-...

From what I see in responses to you, Munger has designed other well-received dorms in the past so that gives him credibility on this topic. It doesn't mean he's right but it's a good chance his thinking is more nuanced than those shitting on it - especially coupled with the current article that describes how he thinks. This is total conjecture but I can imagine him doing something like this: Question: how do you make…

>well-received

By whom? A suspicious site with terrible English and reviews like “you’ll get used to it” and “grat (sic) room”. If Amazon can’t keep scammy reviews away, how is some site like “veryapt” supposed to do so? It seems there is plenty of criticism of the Michigan project (even from residents)[1], but it also differs in a key point, in that all the rooms are suites, whereas the proposed project is even denser, with 8 bedrooms sharing 2 bathrooms a piece.

[1]https://www.reddit.com/r/UCSantaBarbara/comments/qkmp5h/i_wa...*

Re: Suppose I Wanted to Kill a Lot of Pilots (2020)

#48

Post by intpx »

jquery wrote: post #26
g_sch wrote: post #12

It took a second for me to make this connection, but the Charlie Munger in this article is the same Charlie Munger who designed that windowless dorm at UCSB that made the news a few days back. [0] I wonder if he applied the same principles to designing that building. [0] https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-...

Yes. Except it looks like he was thinking “how can I make student housing intolerable” and stopped there, instead of inverting it.

I traded the walk in closet for my bed and desk space in my freshman quad. not having windows was a small price to pay for not having to share the air with 3 other freakin weirdos.One of them could only sleep with a desk lamp on, which didnt bother one of the others who was 100% nocturnal and went into an absolute rage if you woke him up before about 6pm. The third pretty much lived in another room

Re: Suppose I Wanted to Kill a Lot of Pilots (2020)

#49

Post by jquery »

shwoopdiwoop wrote: post #17
rtkwe wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it seems he forgot to invert the question of "How would I design an absolutely depressing and dangerous place to live?" then came up with that design.

Except all the outrage came from people who never lived in his buildings, and the ones who did gave it overwhelmingly great reviews.

Rave reviews? It seems low quality paid reviews are worth every penny.

https://www.reddit.com/r/UCSantaBarbara/comments/qkmp5h/i_wa...

Re: Suppose I Wanted to Kill a Lot of Pilots (2020)

#50

Post by sam0x17 »

xyzelement wrote: post #40
g_sch wrote: post #12

It took a second for me to make this connection, but the Charlie Munger in this article is the same Charlie Munger who designed that windowless dorm at UCSB that made the news a few days back. [0] I wonder if he applied the same principles to designing that building. [0] https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-...

From what I see in responses to you, Munger has designed other well-received dorms in the past so that gives him credibility on this topic. It doesn't mean he's right but it's a good chance his thinking is more nuanced than those shitting on it - especially coupled with the current article that describes how he thinks. This is total conjecture but I can imagine him doing something like this: Question: how do you make…

Creating a dorm that is far from classes and amenities actual encourages social interaction, or it did for my dorm.
Post reply on HN