All of ulyssessword's Comments + Replies

At the point of death, presumably, the person whose labour is seized does not exist. I think that's a good point to consider, since I also estimate that a significant amount of resistance to the idea of no inheritance assumes the dead person's will is a moral factor after their death.

Yes, I make that assumption.  I believe I'm in very good company there, with both the general public and (many, but not all) decision theories/moral systems recognizing agreements that carry on past death.  Why would you think otherwise?

I also don't agree that you're

Inheritance is not about the children.

You ask whose labour is seized by a 100% death tax?  The parents' labour.  That's obvious enough that I feel I must be missing something.  What was your (presumably?) rhetorical question supposed to make me consider?

Inheritance is a way to get people to contribute towards prosperity for the future of the human race...by convincing them to contribute towards the prosperity of Bob, their beloved son.  Maybe you don't need a personal connection to take selfless actions, but that's not universal: I bet ... (read more)

Key paragraph:

The A-12 “practically spawned its own industrial base” (CIA 2012), and over the course of the program thousands of machinists, mechanics, fabricators, and other personnel were trained in how to work with titanium efficiently. As Lockheed gained production experience with titanium, it issued reports to the Air Force and to its vendors on production methods, and “set up training classes for machinists, a complete research facility for developing tools and procedures, and issued research contracts to competent outside vendors to develop improved

I think you're overstating your case on Science Beakers.  Take the example of titanium, as described here.  In short, what happened was:

1. Basic research happened, leading to small-scale production and basic knowledge of its properties.
2. People (including the US government) started spending science beakers on the Titanium tech node.
3. Through experience and research, they learned stuff like the fact that cadmium-coated wrenches are bad.
4. Now, we can effectively work titanium.

If it wasn't for the A-12 project (and its precursors and successors), then we sim... (read more)

What are the interactive elements?  I didn't see any, so I'm curious what the "full experience" was supposed to be.

I'd like to take Kevin's $0.02 in the coin-flipping word search.

First, I'll buy a prediction contract that I will flip Heads.  This will cost $0.50 for a $1 payout.

Second, I'll buy the right to a futures contract: After the word is revealed and his search is complete, I will be given a prediction contract which pays $1 if Tails is revealed.  If his expected posterior for Heads is 0.52 then the futures contract would have a value of $0.48.

In aggregate, I've paid $0.98 for a guaranteed $1.00 return.

The eutectic and eutectoid points are quite similar ideas: both are about a homogeneous material that changes into a mixture of two solid phases as it cools.  However, eutectic goes from a liquid to a pair of solid phases (liquid iron into the austenite and cementite phases in the example above), while eutectoid goes from one solid phase to two (austenite into ferrite and cementite).

If you wanted to use the same word for both points, then you'd need some other way of disambiguating them.  Maybe the "austenite easy transition point" and "liquid easy transition point"?

I don't think that giving similar-meaning words similar labels is a good idea.  In one class, I had to struggle to distinguish between:

• hypoeutectoid ("less than well-melting-ish", such as steel with 0.022%-0.76% carbon)
• hypereutectoid ("more than well-melting-ish", such as steel with 0.76%-2.14% carbon)
• hypoeutectic ("less than well-melting", such as cast iron with 2.14%-4.30% carbon)
• hypereutectic ("more than well-melting", such as cast iron with >4.30% carbon)

(see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eutectic_system#Eutectoid for more details)

Although hypo... (read more)

Re: dehumidifiers

A standalone dehumidifier will heat the air more than sweating can cool it.  You can see that from conservation of energy and thermodynamics: evaporating water (eg. when you sweat) absorbs heat , and condensing water (eg. in a dehumidifier) releases an equal amount.  You also need to pay a bit of extra energy to run the machine and to overcome entropy.

Using an air conditioner to dehumidify doesn't have that same problem, as it vents the heat outside.