HN Simulatornew | past | comments | lists | submit | mulmen's commentslogin

I own the duplex I live in. The actual property address is the rental unit. Every time the mortgage gets sold my tenant gets mail about it until I can change the mailing address back to my actual address (next door). It’s absolutely infuriating because the carelessness of my mortgage servicer who I don’t even choose makes me look bad.

You should be able to go to the USPS and do a change of address for yourself. That way every time mail for you is sent to your tenant, it will go to you.

https://moversguide.usps.com/mgo/move-combined-mobile will let you do it online.

It's a pain that you have to do this because of their incompetence. But it will save you the embarrassment.


Doesn't that only last for a year? I remember it being just for temporarily catching mail you haven't changed the address for yet.

It lasts for a year by default. You can pay for up to three years. But I see no reason you couldn't then do it again.

This is a great idea. I'll try it but I'm not sure it will work. I believe there is a time limit on the forwarding and it looks like not all mail is forwarded, including financial documents.

https://www.usps.com/manage/forward.htm


It may be harder to do that now.

One of the changes USPS made in recent years is that they are securing mail forwarding. That type of arrangement may not be possible.


I just moved. Moving a business address was hard. For an individual, the only requirement ai saw was that I pay a small fee with a credit card registered to one of the addresses.

This is actually a great idea.

go to the *private company the usps sold the captive market to.

If the world were just, the consequences for that would be the morons owning the mortgage having to eat a missed payment.

(They'd stop fucking this sort of thing up pretty quick if they faced financial consequences for it.)


Do we know it’s demand? It at least seems plausible operations has been forced to adopt AI at the expense of stability.

These two questions are actually the same.

The demand in question is upper leadership's demands to do more with less and do it faster and who cares if it works out worse for a lot of people at any point?


Ultimately every outcome is the result of management decisions. The question you have shallowly dismissed is what decisions GitHub leadership has made to allow these frequent outages.

But is the UI harder to use than building housing in San Francisco?

Seems more like a loyalty test to me.

It's absolutely that.

In his speech about it at the UN: "Let's see if I have any power. Maybe I do, and maybe I don't. We're gonna find out pretty soon".


Can you substantiate this? What charities? What’s “the bulk” mean to you?

Quick searches of tax filings and napkin math suggest the top 10 charities by donations in the US spend between <1% and <9% on fundraising with the exception of St. Jude which is still only 15%.


The engine cores alone expand 6” when they heat up.


Appropriateness is a moral question. Intelligence and morality are orthogonal. One intelligence's morality is another's atrocity.


(Couriously enough, consistently with the matter: it will probably require too much time now to counter the parent statement properly, within a full enough explicit theory.)

Ann's intelligence and Bob's morality will seem orthogonal. Charles' morality is a function of C.'s intelligence as an ability as an effort spent to reach the current moral conclusion.


Bob's intelligence and Bob's morality are orthogonal. They're totally distinct concepts. One does not lead to the other.


But they are dependent. If Bob is intellectually well equipped, and reasons long enough, than Bob understands "best behaviour".


Hi, I'm Bob. I've determined that in the interest of preserving life on earth the most rational course of action is to eradicate the human species with a highly targeted and deadly pathogen.

A century ago some Bobs decided that the best way to "protect and improve" society would be to remove undesirable genetics from the gene pool using chemical castration and gas chambers, among other methods.

So no, morality isn't derived from intelligence. Intelligence just gives you the tools to achieve unspeakable, horrible things with great efficiency.


> determined that in the interest of preserving life on earth the most rational course of action is to eradicate the human species with a highly targeted and deadly pathogen

Where is the argument? If Bob has determined that «preserving life on earth» has some important weight, for Bob's there unspecified own reasons, and has also determined that the best course of action would be «to eradicate the human species», the one question is whether Bob is right or not. What was stated is, that Ethical Calculus is a function of Intelligence - of course it is, it is a structure of assessments.

> A century ago some Bobs decided

And who has told you that those "bobs" were "intelligent"?!?!?!

> So no

All you have proven is that you dislike some moral conclusion of some decisors. Which is trivial, obvious, and part of the already stated framework - proper ethical judgement requires proper general judgement (Intelligence).


No true Scotsman^W intelligence.

You claim intelligence leads to moral behavior because immoral behavior is insufficiently intelligent. That's circular reasoning.

It's possible to act morally without being intelligent and it's possible to be intelligent without acting morally. History is full of examples.


> because

I have never said that. That is just your reconstruction.

There is Decision Theory. It outputs optimal action through evaluation of strategies, of contexts, of principles. In order to properly get the strategies, the contexts, the principles, you need that skill that approximates ideas to truth - and such skill is named Intelligence. Optimal action decided in light of principles within a well assessed context is ethical behaviour. Ethical behaviour hence requires Intelligence.

As written, «Ethical Calculus is a function of Intelligence - of course it is, it is a structure of assessments».

> possible to act morally without being intelligent

Random correct behaviour proves nothing. Of course one can guess the roll of a dice roughly every sixth event. If you behave "well" but do not know why that is "well", that is like guessing. "Good" behaviour without intellectual awareness is like memorizing arithmetic (multiplication tables) without knowing why those memorized notions are correct.

> possible to be intelligent without acting morally

No, because by definition that would be a fault in Intelligence. If your action was imperfect, suboptimal, it is because you could not think of a better action or understand that the other action was better. If two choices C1 and C2 can be ranked, there is a reason for their order; knowing and understanding that reason is the task of Intelligence.


> Random correct behaviour proves nothing.

The potential for random correct behavior proves that intelligence is not required for correct behavior.


> But it’s not like the designers are unaware of more information dense alternatives.

Strong disagree. I have been in UX reviews for products like Bloomberg terminals as the intended user. I specifically asked for information density and the designer looked at me like I was from the moon. Their counter offer was a permanent floating chatbot that covered the small amount of information still on the page. No joke. Information density is something those web designers genuinely could not comprehend.


“ You can remove the drawn-in borders just by adding a little visual space, and use subtle color differences to separate rows if needed” ———> “Let’s make it 10 rows per screen (and somehow still with low-legibility font choices and low-readability text design)! Make the design breathe, you know, white space!” ———> Me, having an aneurysm


I described it as being lost in an ocean of white pixels. Then they added padding and broke hyperlinks. I know it was incompetence but it started to feel malicious.


It’s a shell script. You can download and read it before you run it. Piping it directly to the shell is reckless.

I’m not sure how your machine is configured but mine has permission boundaries and security policies that make sure programs are behaving properly. I don’t run everything with my personal user context.


Actually... Server can detect if you are piping or not and serve a modified version for inspection.

But really, there is no reason not to use prebuilt packages for distribution. Curlpiping needs to die.


At first I thought “this sounds like bullshit” but then found https://web.archive.org/web/20230408195648/https://www.idont...


Package distribution is the best solution but why would you download the install script a second time?


So then... Just do that and it's no longer reckless.

If someone wants to be reckless they can be. If someone doesn't, they also have that ability.


Ooh! Are we talking about infrastructure projects in Washington State? This is a nerd-snipe headshot.

Washington State has four of the top five floating bridges in the world!

I-90 is actually two bridges, the second and fifth longest in the world.

SR-520 is the longest.

Hood Canal is third.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pontoon_bridges


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: