karlhungus

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

Having read one of his books, he's not qualified to speak on the topic of psychology.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

ECC encryption seems semi preferred now a days i thought

[–] [email protected] 22 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Executives, focus on executives.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

I'm very lazy so I'd probably start by looking at filters on those sites, if i really wanted to tackle this with programming, i'd:

see if there's an api, or rss feed for these sites, if so i'd pull that down with a cron job and do filtering locally with probably regex.

if not i'd scrape the html and pull out the relevant links with whatever the latest html parser is for the language i use (i.e. it used to be beautiful soup for python, but there's i think a new better one).

but as i said i'm rather lazy, and haven't been on the prowl for jobs for some time.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

I've heard 4% rule, but for myself I use an investment firm that does monte carlo projections, with ages, spending rates, and current assets to give you a rough idea of likelihood of assets lasting till death.

Ive also played with a few of the retirement calculators made by the FIRE crowd i.e. https://www.schwab.com/learn/story/beyond-4-rule-how-much-can-you-spend-retirement

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

To my limited knowledge (reading https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/1551870) this seems to be the Canadian norm: you don't own the land under your land

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (2 children)

20 years, 15%. That is a very low amount. Title is terrible.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Skim the article, it's 20 large municipality's, nowhere is 0 mentioned

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (5 children)

It seems like you maybe thinking this is saying police do nothing, it isn't.

No consistent association means the data doesn't back up higher or lower funding having an impact on crime. It doesn't say anything about rates when the funding is zero or when funding is very high.

I think it means can't pay to reduce crime, or not pay and expect crime to go up.

Testing for zero would be extremely difficult, because we only have one Toronto sized city in Canada.

I'm guessing here but I suspect that there's a significant number of places with zero police presence that have very little crime. And this article suggests that there are very well funded police presences where crime still happens.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (10 children)

How is it impossible to be true?

I'm not sure how you could make this argument without making assumptions about base crime rates.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago

Interviews are a crapshoot, and feedback from them is usually valueless. Good luck to you in your future interviews

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

I think I favour building lots of (hopefully well made) public housing, and taxes on non primary dwellings. I'm not in any way an expert though.

I don't really understand why the statements in your second paragraph are true.

view more: next ›