Live data from Hacker News

Donating forks to the dining hall

ben.page

201–210 of 231 posts

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> everyone will get in the right lane for ten miles. And have 10 miles to get up to speed. As opposed to the zipper merge where everyone waits til the last minute, and everyone has to come to a complete stop. Supposing of course your observations are true. From what I can tell with the "lane closed in 10 miles", is some asshole invariably sees it as a chance to get ahead of everyone else, zooms through the left lane,…

I understand that my argument will lead to the inevitable 'well if everyone one followed all the rules all the time' type response, but there if people are leaving the appropriate following distance with perhaps a bit extra at the as they approach the zipper merge, than there is no reason the merge cannot take place at near highway speeds, certainly with no need to stop. Its no different than how a freeway entry work…

> if people are leaving the appropriate following distance

The general rule is, no, they are not. Unfortunately there is really no penalty in the US if you're following to close unless you get in an accident. I quite often drive on I-35 and so often it's in conditions I call a fast moving traffic jam. People are traveling nearly 80MPH with 2 car distances between each other. Quite often this turns into multi car pileups because someone has to emergency break.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#202
post #137

There's a common pattern in population dynamics that I've observed, which probably has a formal name: A given system with (to simplify) two types of behavior: good and bad will tolerate and self correct up to certain percentage of bad actors (call this the jerk threshold, JT) after which all participants switch to the bad behavior. Examples are line formation for a service, cutting people off in traffic, stealing fro…

How you drive displays your true personality.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#203
post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if you're forcing them to break when you merge then that kind of requires a finger i do my best to avoid forcing anyone to brake, ever usually the people flipping me off are speeding ahead of me from the other lane as soon as they see my signal go on

Oh, so you end up with space to merge easily then if they're speeding up.

it really depends on where they are in relation to me and if people are following them closely

when they see my signal they are behind me so making it much more difficult to merge cleanly - i can either hop over as soon as i signal (not safe) or brake so i can merge behind them, where if they hadn't sped up i'd just move over naturally in the flow of traffic

it really feels to me like your comments are meant to needle my complaint re: folks not understanding the zipper merge, am i misreading you? do you think the zipper merge should not be used?

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#204
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of us genuinely believe in mutual aid and practice it. Talking about mutual aid inspires mutual aid. It's ok to tell stories where good things happen because you got involved.

Uh, of course it's okay to tell stories?

You accused a story teller of only doing it for the clout.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#205
post #166
post #137

There's a common pattern in population dynamics that I've observed, which probably has a formal name: A given system with (to simplify) two types of behavior: good and bad will tolerate and self correct up to certain percentage of bad actors (call this the jerk threshold, JT) after which all participants switch to the bad behavior. Examples are line formation for a service, cutting people off in traffic, stealing fro…

> after which all participants switch to the bad behavior This is how it has become with job applications. So many people started lying on resumes that the job reqs starting raising the requirements for a position, which causes more people to need to lie. If you don't lie, you just don't get a job and starve/die.

The Jerk Threshold is particularly low in low-trust, low-verifiability, usually-not-iterated games, and there's almost no setting that fits those conditions more than a job search.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#206
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to copper.orgs fact page, the "average" single family home (whatever that means) has 151 pounds of copper pipe. The current scrap price for #1 copper where I live is $2.88. That comes out to around $446. That would maybe cover the cost of the pex itself, OR the cost of fittings and tools, but probably not both.

I'd argue keep the copper in place as much as possible. PEX is plastic. I'm sure it contributes to all the microplastics/PFAS we see all over the place.

this is superstitious nonsense. pex contains no pfas and is the least likely kind of plastic to create microplastics

it's disturbing that people saying things like 'I would bet that running a single load of synthetic clothes in the dryer creates more microplastic than making 1000 cut and crimped connections of PEX tubing.' get flagged to death as if they were spamming penis enlargement pills; that comment was obviously correct

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#207
post #137

There's a common pattern in population dynamics that I've observed, which probably has a formal name: A given system with (to simplify) two types of behavior: good and bad will tolerate and self correct up to certain percentage of bad actors (call this the jerk threshold, JT) after which all participants switch to the bad behavior. Examples are line formation for a service, cutting people off in traffic, stealing fro…

You can think of the Jerk Threshold problem as one of a prisoner's dilemma with a (sufficiently large) extra term, which you can think of as some combination of personal guilt, societal punishment, and whatever positive prosocial instincts humans have.

In the classic prisoner's dilemma, your payoff is +3 if you defect and the other prisoner doesn't, +2 if neither of you defects, +1 if both of you defect, and 0 if you don't defect and they do. There's no Jerk Threshold in this problem - regardless of your opponent's behavior, in isolation, you are always better off defecting.

But let's add the extra Antijerk Term - call it A - that you pay to defect. This could be you feeling bad about defecting, or it could represent the chance that you face retaliation for defecting later, whatever - there's some slight cost to being a jerk. We can see how the Jerk Threshold changes.

Your payoff matrix is now [[2, 3-A], [0, 1-A]]. If your opponent has a probability p of defecting, you can compute:

E[cooperate] = p * 0 + (1-p) * 2 = 2 - 2p, with the former term corresponding to you getting screwed and the latter corresponding to cooperation.

E[defect] = p * (1-A) + (1-p) * (3-A) = 3 - 2p - A, with the former term corresponding to the defect-defect state and the latter one being you screwing them.

For A 1, the problem abruptly shifts into a cooperation game, because 2 - 2p > 3 - 2p - A for A > 1.

-----

In this case, the Jerk Threshold abruptly shifts from 0 to 1 (that is, nothing could make you cooperate -> nothing could make you defect). But in the real world, the A term varies depending on context. The A term with a friend is very high, because you have a lot of opportunity for retaliation and they'll feel especially bad screwing you over. The A term with a stranger you're somewhat hostile to is low (maybe even negative). And A varies from actor to actor - some of us have stronger consciences than others. So you end up with bubbles where there's a stable local equilibrium (because the A values are high internally and that maintains stable cooperate-cooperate equilibria) despite differences with the outside world.

Properly modeling this probably looks something like the Ising model [1] on some complicated social graph. Which explains why we see these kinds of phase transitions - most real graphs are dense enough to have them. The bubbles we just described correspond to magnetic domains, and the incentives not to cooperate while in contact with a defect-bubble (or vice-versa) correspond to the high potential energy of domain walls.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ising_model

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a pet peeve of mine, but also isn't it the most practical? Don't we want the lanes consumed as much as possible so traffic disruptions aren't distributed further back down the road?

Growing up learning to drive on the East Coast, my intuition finds a sweet spot between the two, typically merging while moving slowly when there is a natural gap between cars. What I tend to see instead is hard braking ripple back down the line to a half-dozen cars or more for each car trying to merge right at the end because suddenly there are two cars right next to each other and one lane of car width left. Every…

Why look around and anticipate the movements of others when you can finish your tweet and jab the brakes on everyone's day behind you?

Duh.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I don't think pure altruism even exists, per the definition. Actively and knowingly doing something good for someone else for absolutely no personal benefit is impossible. This is to all intents and purposes a contradiction.

I disagree with you, but it would probably be an impossibility for me to prove it! Why? Well, as soon as a truly altruistic act is observed by third-parties, there's a chance the actor could be rewarded for it (for instance, by being honoured by society). Then, we would have at least the ability to claim that the actor was doing it for the chance of a reward, rather than purely selflessly. Thus, truly altruistic acts…

> Thus, truly altruistic acts can only be immune from accusations of selfishness if they are entirely unobservable!

Are you yourself not an observer? If you feel good about having done it, it can't be completely selfless, you are benefiting by feeling good.

I realise I'm splitting hairs here, just to re-iterate - I'm not trying to take away from kind acts.

Re: Donating forks to the dining hall

#210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brawndo! it's what plants crave. Where do you draw the line though when catering to the uniformed? There is a reason we hire SME's.

You design systems for the way nature works not how you wish nature worked ideally.

And you think nature made drivers in some countries behave different to drivers in other countries?
Post reply on HN