This is dr2chase's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following dr2chase's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
dr2chase
Recent Activity
For example: https://www.sigarch.org/what-happens-to-us-does-not-happen-to-most-of-you/ (Kathryn, aka Dr. McKinley, is two years younger than me, we overlapped at Rice U, near the peak of women in US computer science.)
1 reply
I no longer assume that more bikes = less cars. Induced demand is a thing, I have even seen it for added quality bicycle parking at a transit terminus. Of course, it goes in both directions, both up and down. There's probably a money angle on this whole induced demand thing.
1 reply
Not supposed to drive either on the 1% most-unpleasant weather days. Literally, not, the governor tells people to stay home.
1 reply
I wonder about this for the rental-bicycle market (and for the 2-bike-racks-on-the-front-of-buses transportation "market"). If my trip to work depends on something that can plausibly "run out", then I cannot make my plans depend on it. When I travel to NYC on business, I take Citibike between hotel and work, but my plans must include adequate time to locate a bike and an empty dock near my destination. If I get lucky I can kill a little time at the office or nearby, but it's not the same as the reliability of my own bike.
1 reply
Not quite so. For flattish commutes in the sub-7-mile range, one may choose to ride a bicycle, assuming one can be grabbed before they are all taken. That makes you mostly immune to traffic congestion (with about 10,000 bicycle commuting miles accumulated in the last 3.5 years, I think I have some small authority here, including the cases of "snow", "rain", "groceries", and "give daughter a ride to summer class at Tufts that meets at peak evening rush"). It's also as fast as driving, given traffic; again, this has been tested empirically, at least in the Boston area. If the bikes were e-enhanced, my plausible range increases to roughly 10 miles and hills become less of an issue (replace cruising speed of 14mph with 20mph; a large assist is not required unless large hills are involved). Collective policy would make this far more pleasant and efficient, but apparently drivers enjoy their traffic jams (or rather, they derive adequate pleasure from belonging to the tribe of motorists that they'll reject alternatives). Collective policy would also help us reduce the cost of living within a few miles of work.
1 reply
"Important issue" and "that I care about" can change over time, so sometimes you just ignore people and keep them in the feed anyhow. I have a second test, based a whole lot on being married to a sociologist and attending some bias-training sessions at work. Apparently about the only way to make headway on unconscious bias is constant exposure. Therefore, in my Twitter feed, I try to follow interesting people who aren't like me. I.e., a conscious effort to get out of my able-cis-het-white-male-US bubble. (Not too worried about the rural-redneck-racist content missing from my feed; I grew up with that, complete with KKK bookstore and guns. Got conservatives covered too -- a lot of my ancestors are buried in Hanover, NH) So, one of my interests is (urban, utility) biking, there's no shortage of white guys there, no doubt, but there's also women, some black, some trans, some disabled. And also UK biking, because there's interesting things happening there, and some Dutch biking because they know what they're doing and the rest of us are just faking it. I do computer stuff, and it turns out that for whatever reason there's a mess of women in security and/or hacking, so I follow them, it's also something I need to know more about anyway. Politics, you can pretty much count on guys like me for the lamest takes, of course you follow women, POC, LGBTQ, and people from other countries. It feels to me like the bike stuff is kinda-sorta forming a community. It overlaps transit/urbanist/housing twitter, and I've been learning a lot that I would otherwise have missed. I follow SB827 in CA, I follow rollout and use of (separated) cycling superhighways in London, I see livetweets of community meetings in Seattle and Philadelphia and Mountain View (Silicon Valley is infuriating, Mountain View in particular: https://dr2chase.wordpress.com/2016/05/11/biking-in-mountain-view-has-tremendous-upside-potential/ )
1 reply
One problem is that none of the social media apps is good at letting you control who you (don't) interact with. There's people in this world that I won't learn anything from and they won't learn from me; any time spent in a discussion with them is wasted. Many of them are trolls, whose main goal seems to be to make you look foolish and/or waste your time, or at least create such a pile of noise that otherwise-interested people are driven away. The faster you can arrange to never notice the existence of these people on the internet, the more pleasant your experience will be. Twitter at least has an API, so if you are capable of hacking, you can, say, decide to designate a set of vile people V and a set of interesting people I, and arrange to block anyone not in I who follows 3 or more people in V. And "V" turns out to be not too hard to identify when you come across it, and you can bootstrap people into it from their followers. Voila, 600,000 people blocked, and Twitter sucks noticeably less. There are 3rd party tools that are supposed to help you do this (Twitter BlockChain, Blocktogether) but these are crude and don't scale that well. V = people who act trolly, whose profile also contains certain keywords, plus followers who have those keywords. As a practical matter I think these are mostly either robot or provo accounts, judging by patterns of when-joined and the userid and who they follow. I'd love to make this work with machine learning, but in practice that requires a larger training set than I'm willing to provide to get good results, though Twitter has access to (for example) all the blocks form people in my "interesting" set, perhaps they are people like me and thus we would block similarly and we could leverage that. I = friends(me) union friends(friends(me)) I suspect that social media companies have some combination of bending over backwards not to inhibit "Free Speech" (you should have the right to annoy anyone on the internet at least once) and fear of creating "bubbles" (if I want Fox "News", I know where to find it, thank you very much).
1 reply
The same is true for cigarette, heroin, and cocaine consumption, right? We're not homo economicus, we can be manipulated and addicted, and abso-fucking-lutely Facebook tries to do this to get us to spend more time there.
1 reply
That was interesting. But since results like: "then Bill Gates's 10,000th dollar had 4,000,000 times the utility to Gates than the guy from Oaxaca's dollar had." are clearly bullshit, your model must be broken.
1 reply
See also: https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/appel/intractability-financial-derivatives/
1 reply
Computational complexity is variably bad; there are some NP-complete problems (traveling salesman) where we can get within a constant factor pretty easily, and some (bin-packing) where not very tricky algorithms yield a pretty happy constant factor. But there's other where we know we'll never get a constant factor guarantee, and we stare plenty hard at sub-problems to see if we can get a handle on those (graph coloring -- used in quite a few compilers, general problem has no constant factor approximation unless P=NP, but subproblems are tractable). And don't forget that randomized algorithms often have computational complexity that is good enough for making a steady profit, even when they either don't guarantee a timely solution or don't guarantee that their "solution" is correct. Of course, a clever trader would just be using a randomized steganographic protocol to communicate insider tips, and screw all this problem-solving crap. 1/3 of the time the protocol yields lies, 2/3 of the time it yields good information, just use it to make repeated steady bets and statistically print money (if this idea is original to me I'll be gobsmacked, though I recall having it over 20 years ago).
1 reply
I think you are right, I did eyeball math. Another way: 3.6 trillion km/year (see https://dr2chase.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/short-trips-in-cars/ , 4th graph, convert to km ), or 700 billion kwh per your figures. Recent annual electrical production is 4.1 billion kwh ( https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3 ) So, holding everything constant and assuming your 5.1 wh/m figure is correct (looks right to me), a 17% increase. So you are definitely right and I am slightly less pessimistic. But still, a near-full conversion to non-fossil-fuel AND an increase? Bleah.
1 reply
Been trying to get my head around how pessimistic we should be about this. See http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html for some baseline pessimism, look at the roughly equal amounts of CO2 for transportation and for electricity generation. I.E., if we want to keep transporting things in the same way in some sort of electric vehicles of similar size etc, we need to make electrical generation green, and add 50% (that's a crude estimate -- about half of current generation is from coal and gas, power plants are more efficient but there's losses in distribution, batteries, and conversion. Sources of energy: https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3 ) (No, bicycles won't do it, not with current trip distributions. 90% of miles are from trips longer than 5 miles.)
1 reply
"Exceptionally mild" = shorts weather in Boston on Christmas Eve. And when that blob-o-warm blew on up to the North Pole, it briefly made it all the way up to freezing. But it snowed last night, so global warming is clearly a hoax.
1 reply
I'm not so sure about employers, but I think that quite a few women and some men have been caught in an enhanced-appearance arms race -- so breasts get augmented, lipo gets sucked, hair gets colored, noses get jobbed, etc. I have been lucky enough to avoid this, but I can darn sure see it and I don't like it, because I hate to see people end up in Red Queen territory (by definition, with nothing to show for it, merely effort expended). Given that social pressure, in my contrary way I'm quite happy to see I-did-it-for-my-own-fun enhancements, which I think still includes most tattoos and all the various crazy piercings and gaugings. This does lead to some weird cognitive dissonances where one part of my brain may find something to be actually unattractive or unwise (tongue piercings I have heard tend to be bad for your teeth, unless the stud is made of some softer material like teflon) but another part is happily cheering on the effort. I'm a little baffled that I'm even less fond of conformity now than when I was younger. (Note that I have neither piercings not colorings because (a) I am chicken and (b) too many choices).
1 reply
and if you get the video tattoo when you're young, it can start out 720p, later to become 1080p as you age. I assume before that, that our video chats will come with real-time full-motion makeover (and the porn industry will lead the way, because the internet is for porn). Speaking of enhancements....
1 reply
With video skin, who can photoproselytize....
1 reply
Easy to explain (perhaps not correctly, but a good bet). Status quo bias. Look at the relatively rapid acceptance of cell phones, then smart phones, the demise of phone booths. Or here near Boston, where we have people living in "streetcar neighborhoods" where the tracks were ripped up or paved over decades ago, now worried that running a streetcar (Green Line) route to their neighborhood will "destroy it". We're completely stupid about change -- we oppose it tooth and nail, till we suddenly forget that it ever happened. And speaking as a guy who has a camera on his bike helmet, 99+% of that video will pass pretty quickly to the bit bucket; nobody has the time to review it, nobody has the space to store it. Even with the ability to mark the interesting bits when they happen, half the time when I go back I cannot figure out what it was I thought was interesting -- and that's with a mere hour per day of video. I can hypothesize about future advances in machine learning that would allow our robot minions to automatically spot the "good bits" but I'm having a bit of a hard time getting my head around that much computing and storage being cheap enough to deploy that we (widely) use it for that (if nothing else, there are so many competing and more worthy applications). I should probably do some back-of-the-envelope arithmetic to check that.
1 reply
upside of twitter: https://twitter.com/_youhadonejob/status/589926313298894848 https://twitter.com/sarahchurchwell/status/589686383155027968 https://twitter.com/grantimahara/status/589534870176669696 Or follow a person of reliably questionable taste like me: https://twitter.com/Dr2chase
1 reply
"Face the Nation" is still a thing? What's their intended demographic, anyway? I'm white, 55, male, upper middle income, and I don't know what station it's on and I am only guessing that it runs on Sunday. Sounds like I'm not missing much. I think before you criticize their choices too much, you should check their audience. If they're not interested in actual information, why would expect FtN to pick someone who was good at that?
1 reply
"There is no chance of an upward jump in interest rates large enough to require enough of a tax increase to push the economy over the top of the Laffer curve and into unsustainability" Sure, if you thought the peak of the Laffer curve was somewhere between 60 and 80%. Recall the Reagan tax cuts, what was used to justify them, and the levels of taxation involved. I think they were bullshtting us, you probably do too, but for many people the proof rule "moar munny in my pocket, must be true" is good enough.
1 reply
Ever since learning that the welfare maximization proof required rational actors with good information and independent utility functions (is 0/3 good enough for economic proofs?), I've been a little wary of any results that rested on microeconomic foundations. Do these guys have a model that allows the existence of goldbugs, the Crazification Factor, and the NYTimes continuing to employ "Chunky Reese Witherspoon" Ross Douthat and "Humble" David Brooks? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3dZl3yfGpc
1 reply
Interesting that there are all these responses arguing about the appropriate ignorance calibration -- is is current rate, or cumulative? What about the oceans? And why linear, when we know it is log, but at this point in the curve they're similar.... Anyone here wonder if maybe the IPCC has thought about this a little bit already? It's obvious that Asness and Brown are just shilling out whatever reputation they have left, I'm not sure there's much to be gained by arguing about whether they chose the right amount of how faux-stupidity.
1 reply