You can still gamble.

When it comes to hard drugs I can understand why there are reasonable arguments for legalization of personal use.

Idk how many reasonable arguments extend the overton window to thinking that meth should be advertised seemingly all over the place. Because gambling ads are actually everywhere.

I'm actually consistent in the other direction.

I find intrusive advertising toxic and want it all reduced or banned.

Not just tobacco and gambling ads, but everything else as well.

(No, I don't care that it is like advocating for democracy in 10th-century England and would entirely blow up how our economy currently "works")

I was addicted to hard drugs. When in therapy I've met people there for gambling addiction. The takeout lesson was that for some people it is basically the same as stimulants. They had the same issues, fucked up their lives just as much.

So yeah it is on the scale of advertising meth.

I was about to ask the GP why is this a ‘public health crisis’, so appreciative of your preemptive response a little scroll down.

I still don’t like calling personal self-inflicted non-chemical things a ‘public health crisis’ because it seems open to so many other things…. But if we ignore the terminology, we’d probably agree about the reality of it being a problem anyway. The lure of pointless semantic arguments is a public discourse crisis.

The gambling industry has never shown evidence of self-control.

They seem to be pretty diligent about it, I mean once I hit on 17 and won on 22, but generally they are pretty vigilant about it.

Modern sports gambling ads amount to fraud because winners are prevented from winning more through wager restrictions. The whole industry can only exist because it cheats and lies.

The most damning thing about the online gambling sites/apps is that they don't care about how much you bet, only how much you lose. They aggressively limit and ban their biggest customers if those customers win.

Use polymarket, they don't care.

No. They are called "vices" because you get stuck in them. Ten thousand studies on mice tell us that addiction isn't learned morality but innate biology.

We also pass laws regulating murder/arson/theft even though those too can be avoided through self control.

The studies that showed rats would suck on a morphine feed until they got very sick had a floor which was demonstrated in the 1970s

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

We used to be able to pull ourselves up by our bootstraps. Being influencable by advertising is a moral failing.

Theoretically, yes, in practice, no.

Turns out building houses is super profitable once you remove the cost of building materials, labor, and land.

Ok, but a more honest comparison here would be removing the cost of hiring architects and hiring lawyers to draft contracts, not all the per-house costs.

> removing the cost of hiring architects and hiring lawyers to draft contracts

For multi-unit houses, sure. The actual analogy is closer to removing the cost of the cement plant from every house. Fixed versus variable costs.

excellent, i dont need it to think, i need it to execute.

from people without ad blockers, but honestly facebook is not the free open internet.

in theory, no, in practice, yes.

By "in practice" do you mean with one-implementation languages?

If there's more than one implementation, there better be a standard, and it's risky to assume any behavior not specified in the standard will be shared by all implementations.

Even with one-implementation languages it becomes risky to assume behaviors will remain the same as the implementation evolves.

i mean the whole ecosystem, compiler, CPU, etc. I think that the compiler will produce performant code, and i think that the CPU will execute code that operates a certain way faster, and that its pretty safe to assume this.

Basically, I think that in 10 years, in practice, radix sort will still be faster than quicksort, despite theory saying its slower.

Theory says radix sort on a set of strings runs in time linear in the sum of the sizes of the strings.

if you use the linux kernel that amount of ram is tunable, and write will cause backpressure on its own when this is exceeded.

limited resources, no modern GPUs, no $10 billion dev budgets.

pair it with codewhale, 50 agents, 200 MB of ram.

CPUs aren't black boxes. They are actually much better documented than almost all the software that runs on them.

If you want to treat the CPU as a black box, trust me you do not want to use a CPU with out a branch predictor, your slow code will run like molasses frozen in antarctica.

The regular algo will be lightyears slower on any CPU that does not have a branch predictor.