Someone tosses a coin ten times; it comes up heads every time. What's the probability it comes up heads on the next toss? (Pretty darn high—part of @nntaleb's work is unprogramming you from your high-school rules of thumb.) Now consider the (related) Gambler's fallacy...
Very interesting thread. For more general cases (\U0001f447) I proposed skin in the game as \u201cwhat makes imitation work\u201d but didn\u2019t consider professional scammers incl. casinos
— Luca Dellanna (@DellAnnaLuca) January 18, 2021
Both scammers and casinos artificially inflate the crowd to provide an illusion of \u201cI can\u2019t be the only idiot.\u201d https://t.co/cMUrQpxc15
More from Simon DeDeo
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
More from Crypto
"Blockchain technology is energy-intensive..." => No, it doesn't have to be.
Let's look at Proof-Of-Stake, an alternative to the energy-intensive Proof-Of-Work algorithm.
🧵🔽
1️⃣ A Quick Recap On Proof-Of-Work
A Proof-Of-Work algorithm requires miners to do a certain amount of work that is compute-intensive to gain access to a service or the right to do something. This algorithm, by design, also requires that the work done shall not ...
... be reusable for anything else than what it was performed for. This lies at the core of the security concept of a blockchain. To gain the right to append a new block to a chain and to get some currency as a reward, there is work to be done, and this work must be verifyable.
That work is a race between different miners. Many miners try to compete and to be the first to find the answer to a problem presented to them. This implies that a lot of energy is wasted as only the first correct solution is accepted.
You can find a more detailed thread on Proof-Of-Work
Let's look at Proof-Of-Stake, an alternative to the energy-intensive Proof-Of-Work algorithm.
🧵🔽
1️⃣ A Quick Recap On Proof-Of-Work
A Proof-Of-Work algorithm requires miners to do a certain amount of work that is compute-intensive to gain access to a service or the right to do something. This algorithm, by design, also requires that the work done shall not ...
... be reusable for anything else than what it was performed for. This lies at the core of the security concept of a blockchain. To gain the right to append a new block to a chain and to get some currency as a reward, there is work to be done, and this work must be verifyable.
That work is a race between different miners. Many miners try to compete and to be the first to find the answer to a problem presented to them. This implies that a lot of energy is wasted as only the first correct solution is accepted.
You can find a more detailed thread on Proof-Of-Work
Proof-Of-Work is the name of a cryptographic algorithm that is used for some blockchains when new blocks are to be appended to the chain.
— Oliver Jumpertz (@oliverjumpertz) April 3, 2021
Let's take a higher-level look at how this one works, shall we?
\U0001f9f5\U0001f53d
You May Also Like
Tip from the Monkey
Pangolins, September 2019 and PLA are the key to this mystery
Stay Tuned!
1. Yang
2. A jacobin capuchin dangling a flagellin pangolin on a javelin while playing a mandolin and strangling a mannequin on a paladin's palanquin, said Saladin
More to come tomorrow!
3. Yigang Tong
https://t.co/CYtqYorhzH
Archived: https://t.co/ncz5ruwE2W
4. YT Interview
Some bats & pangolins carry viruses related with SARS-CoV-2, found in SE Asia and in Yunnan, & the pangolins carrying SARS-CoV-2 related viruses were smuggled from SE Asia, so there is a possibility that SARS-CoV-2 were coming from
Pangolins, September 2019 and PLA are the key to this mystery
Stay Tuned!
1. Yang
Meet Yang Ruifu, CCP's biological weapons expert https://t.co/JjB9TLEO95 via @Gnews202064
— Billy Bostickson \U0001f3f4\U0001f441&\U0001f441 \U0001f193 (@BillyBostickson) October 11, 2020
Interesting expose of China's top bioweapons expert who oversaw fake pangolin research
Paper 1: https://t.co/TrXESKLYmJ
Paper 2:https://t.co/9LSJTNCn3l
Pangolinhttps://t.co/2FUAzWyOcv pic.twitter.com/I2QMXgnkBJ
2. A jacobin capuchin dangling a flagellin pangolin on a javelin while playing a mandolin and strangling a mannequin on a paladin's palanquin, said Saladin
More to come tomorrow!
3. Yigang Tong
https://t.co/CYtqYorhzH
Archived: https://t.co/ncz5ruwE2W
4. YT Interview
Some bats & pangolins carry viruses related with SARS-CoV-2, found in SE Asia and in Yunnan, & the pangolins carrying SARS-CoV-2 related viruses were smuggled from SE Asia, so there is a possibility that SARS-CoV-2 were coming from
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.