Lyman Stone, who is screenshotted in this post, attempts to address this [1]. His conclusion is that migration is not sufficient to explain the effect, but I have not looked in detail. In the past I have found his explanations compelling but I can't vouch for this one.
I believe that means you're in agreement with the author. The point of the tweet is to counter a claim that low fertility in cities is caused by high prices; if large families leave cities for extra space then they're not doing so because of price.
> I have written frequently about the relationship between high housing density* and low fertility. The most common counter argument is that the real problem is urban prices.
Before we age, we lack experience, context, produce less useful work per hour worked, and get paid less. Legality aside, isn't it rational to discriminate against younger people?
I would very much love to see the "simple CRDT" implementation described above, seems like it would be a great learning tool and/or foundation on which to build something more complicated!
The CRDT I was referencing was Shelf by Greg Little. He's given a few talks about it at the braid meetups. When he first showed it off, Kevin Jahns (the Yjs author) was also there and was as impressed as I was:
I don't think it requires any particular paranoia or self-loathing, just the day-in, day-out grind against the receiver's psyche.
We take it for granted that living with an emotionally-abusive person deeply affects someone's sense of self-perception, but for some reason when advertisers use the same sort of tactics, but at a slightly lower level spread across a greater amount of time, we're supposed to accept it as appropriate?
We all have a finite store of, let's call it "self confidence"; why should we accept as status quo that all comers have a right to drain some of it every day in order to line their own pocketbooks?
It doesn't drain me. It's anecdotal but no one I know seems to be suffering from some psychological equivalent of battered-spouse syndrome due to the effects of advertising.
I don't even really see a lot of advertising that uses psychologically demeaning tactics, sneering and flippant insults and shaming and the like. Maybe I just don't notice them. But to me, demeaning your customers isn't likely to result in them being more likely to buy your product.
Does it drain me entirely every day? No. Does it drain me some days or in particular instances? Certainly! Are some people far less resilient than I, and are perhaps drained to a larger degree? It stands to reason so.
To be clear I'm not saying any one advertiser is directly attempting to demean any particular person into buying their particular product, because clearly this isn't a winning strategy. It's the dose that makes the poison, however.
If one person walks up to me on the street and says "I've got some shirts that would make you look really slim" I would shrug it off as a weird happening. When the second person say "I used to look large, but this brand really made the pounds seem less obvious", I think it's been an odd day. When this continues to happen over the course of the month, perhaps I begin to think I'm looking a bit large around the middle.
Taken in isolation, no one instance is going to break me. Taken together, over a lifetime? That could change my own perception of myself in ways I can't even begin to estimate.
>When this continues to happen over the course of the month, perhaps I begin to think I'm looking a bit large around the middle.
Maybe you are. I certainly am. Are these theoretical shirt-sellers trying to convince you you're getting overweight to get you to buy a shirt for overweight people, or have they noticed you're overweight and have a shirt you might want to buy? One is clearly abusive but the other isn't.
Indeed. I wonder though whether they could possibly know the answer to that question to a degree of confidence that would make them comfortable to pursue me endlessly to make their sale, and sell and trade my information and their inferences about me with their advertising partners in order for them to do the same, just with 1000 different variants of the above example.
And I wonder whether they're incentivized to care. In either cases above, my money is still green and smells like money, and makes the same number go up in their quarterly sales goal dashboard.
My point, and I gather the point of the Banksy quote, is that any one instance has a negligible effect on me, but that in aggregate I'm stuck staring down the barrel of a machine that has infinite stamina and resources that's attempting to wear me down, and is likely succeeding in ways I can't detect, nor have the power to detect if I wanted to.
If being exposed to this aggregate process all day makes me less patient with my family at night, to what degree is it worth it? If it makes me less willing to treat someone else with kindness, is it still justified if it's only a _little_ less willing?
No single advertiser is literally laughing at me while doing the backstroke across their vault full of money, but none of them needs to have such overtly malicious intent for the aggregate effect of the entire system on me to be just as corrosive.
In 12 years in Austin I have encountered zero scorpions indoors, and maybe a single-digit number outdoors. This despite essentially constantly walking barefoot in both. In my entire life in Texas I've been stung by a scorpion exactly one time.
We get about one or two a month here in the summer, in the house. There’s plenty more in the yard. We found one in our daughter’s crib and another stung my wife while we were asleep in bed. We’ve got brown recluse, black widows, and rattlesnakes too. Welcome to Texas!
I used to have this problem, and found it to be caused by a combination of two factors:
1) Growing up in a house with low water pressure. If the machine doesn't have much pressure to work with, it seems to do a bad job more or less regardless of what you try to do
2) Given you have sufficient water pressure, using cheap detergent. After switching to a "top of the line" dishwasher detergent packet, a dishwasher went from "borderline useless" to "more clean than I can get them by hand".
Number 2 was by _far_ the most impactful thing I've done; I can essentially now scrape dishes of large food chunks then put them straight in the dishwasher, and have a >= 98% confidence they'll come out completely clean.
I’ll second the cascade platinum recommendation. I though my dishwasher was broken when we used another detergent brand. I took it apart to see if the filter was plugged and even put a GoPro camera and led light in it to make sure the washing arms were spinning. Turns out it was because we used a cheap detergent.
Indeed it can, but I believe the point is that it's not round-tripable, meaning you can't parse the resulting serialized JSON back into its original form, the one that contained the Date objects.
If you could do so, JSON.stringify/parse would be a convenient way to do a deep clone.
Yeah that's right. All I'm saying is that no matter what, the following sentence is false:
> An example of a non-serializable value type is the Date object - it is printed in a non ISO-standard format and cannot be parsed back to its original value :(.
I'm a former Arch user who's been using NixOS as my daily-driver at home for about a year now, and I've really enjoyed it, even above Arch (which I'm also a big fan of).
The biggest gain over Arch for me is the safety net it gives you in making configuration changes. Once I've got the machine working, that state can be booted to for as long as I care to keep its pointer around. This means things like kernel upgrades are no longer the anxiety-inducing problem they used to be on Arch for me; if an upgrade fails, I can quickly reboot to the previous state without having to do anything special.
As a result of this, I no longer need to put off kernel upgrades when I'm trying to get something time-sensitive done! To be fair, I was running the ZFS-enabled Arch kernel, which was the cause of most of my problems. However, using the ZFS kernel on NixOS has been anything _but_ problematic; it just works, and keeps working!
Nix/NixOS also makes setting up a new machine just the way I like it a joy. If I move to another machine, need to build a new one, or need to re-image the current one for any reason, my configuration (stored in source control) follows me around without me having to remember all the one-off tweaks I did to make, say, hibernation work correctly.
I haven't yet mastered building packages since I don't find myself needing to compile things from source all that often, but I can certainly feel the pain of learning how to do so; it still feels like quite a mountain to climb before I'd really know what I was doing.
Learning to build your own packages is a bit of a chore, but once you get there, it could not be easier.
I suspect building your own packages for Debian or Redhat would be much more difficult.
Let alone getting that package accepted upstream, which is not that hard with Nixos.
