Huh, thanks for the correction.

Smaller correction - I think you've had her buy an extra pair of boots. At $260 she's already bought one pair, so we apply $x\mapsto 1.07x-20$ thirteen times, then multiply by 1.07 again for the final year's interest, and she ends with no boots, so that's $239.41. (Or start with $280 and apply $x\mapsto 1.07(x-20)$ fourteen times.)

Not sure why my own result is wrong. Part of it is that I forgot to subtract the money actually spent on boots - I did "the $20 she spends after the first year gets one year's interest, so that's $21.40; the $20 she spends after the second year gets two years' interest, so that's $22.90..." but actually it's only $1.40, $2.90 and so on. But even accounting for that, I get $222.58. So let's see...

Suppose she only needs to buy two pairs of boots. According to your method she goes $40 → $21.40 → $1.50. (Or, $40 and no boots → $20 and boots → $21.40 and no boots a year later → $1.40 and boots → $1.50 and no boots a year later.) According to mine, of her original $40, $20 of it earns no interest and $20 of it earns a years' interest. But that assumes the interest she earns in that year is withdrawn, she gets to keep it but it doesn't keep earning interest. So that's why I got the wrong answer.

Well, I should like to see some examples. So far, our tally of actual examples of this alleged phenomenon seems to still be zero. All the examples proffered thus far… aren’t.

From https://siderea.dreamwidth.org/1477942.html:

"These boots," I said gesturing at what I was trying on, on my feet, "cost $200. Given that I typically buy a pair for $20 every year, that means these boots have to last 10 years to recoup the initial investment."

That was on January 17, 2005. They died earlier this month – that is in the first week of December, 2018. So: almost but not quite 14 years.

So, purely as an investment, they returned a bit under $80, which is a 40% ROI.

But... if we're talking about this just as an investment, we need to compare to other investments. Let's say the S&P 500 returns 7% consistently (I think that's pessimistic - note, not adjusting for inflation because the $20 boots haven't changed with inflation either).

• In one world, Siderea buys $200 boots and invests $80. After 14 years, she has $\$80\cdot {1.07}^{14}=\$206$ and no boots.
• In another world, Siderea buys $20 boots and invests $260. A year later she withdraws $20 and buys boots, and so on. After 14 years, she has... finite geometric series, $20(r^1+...+r^{14})$, I think she has $483 and no boots.

So if we think of this as a purely financial investment, I guess it was a bad one?

(This is also often missing when people talk about buying versus renting. Yes, the mortgage is often lower than rent, and house value is likely higher at the end, but you gave up investing your deposit. How do those effects compare? Probably depends on time and place.)

Sam Vimes is a copper, and sees poverty lead to precarity, and precarity lead to Bad Things Happening In Bad Neighborhoods.

Hm, does he? It's certainly a reasonable guess, but offhand I don't remember it coming up in the books, and the Thieves and Assassins guilds will change the dynamic compared to what we'd expect on Earth.

We got spam and had to reset the link. To get the new link, append the suffix "BbILI8HzX3zgJF8i" to the prefix "https://chat.whatsapp.com/IUIZc3". Hopefully spambots can't yet do that automatically.

This reddit thread has the claim:

Something related that you CAN do, and that is more likely to make a difference, is not ever to heat up plastic in a microwave, wash it in a dishwasher, or cook with plastic utensils. Basically, the softening agents in a lot of plastics aren't chemically bonded to the rest of the polymers, and heating the plastic makes those chemicals ready to leach into whatever food contacts them. That's a huge class of chemicals, none of which are LD-50-level dangerous, but many of which have been associated with hormonal changes, microbiome issues, and a whole host of other stuff that fits in the general category of "Why do organisms work differently than they did 100 years ago?"

Notably this is about plasticizers, a different thing than microplastics.

One question I have that might be relatively tractable: if I'm using plastic containers for leftovers, how much difference is there between

1. Store in the container, put on plate to microwave and eat.
2. Store and microwave in the container, put on plate to eat.
3. Who needs a plate anyway? Just eat from the container.

The bit about plastic chopping boards kind of hints that (3) might give a lot more microplastics than (2)? But you're probably less violent to the container than the chopping board.

We suggest these low-hanging actions one can take to reduce their quantity exposure:

a. Stop using plastic bottles and plastic food storage containers,

b. Stop using plastic cutting boards,

For people who didn't read the rough notes dumps: it seems like (b) is a way bigger effect size than (a).

There are 3 people. Each person announces an integer. The smallest unique integer wins: e.g. if your opponents both pick 1, you win with any number. If all 3 pick the same number, the winner is picked randomly

Question: what’s the Nash equilibrium?

(I assume this is meant to be natural numbers or positive ints? Otherwise I don't think there is a nash equilibrium.)

So it is. Other than that, the remaining details I needed were:

2740 Telegraph Ave, Berkeley
94705
habryka@lightconeinfrastructure.com
Oliver Habryka

Assuming all went well, I just donated £5,000 through the Anglo-American charity, which should become about (£5000 * 1.25 * 96% = £6000 ≈ $7300) to lightcone.

I had further questions to their how to give page, so:

• You can return the forms by email, no need to post them. (I filled them in with Firefox's native "draw/write on this pdf" feature, handwriting my signature with a mouse.)
• If donating by bank transfer, you send the money to "anglo-american charity limited", not "anglo-american charitable foundation".
• For lightcone's contact details I asked on LW intercom. Feels rude to put someone's phone number here, so if you're doing the same as me, I'm not gonna save you that step.

E: and all does seem to have gone well. I got an email on Jan 25 confirming they'd passed $7260 on to Lightcone.