Do you remember if it blew a fuse or tripped a breaker?

So that is to say I think a small amount of secret reasoning would be possible, e.g. if the location is known or guessed from the beginning by another means and the reasoning steps are made up to justify the conclusion.

The more clearly sound the reasoning steps are, the less plausible that scenario is.

I think a great illustration is an extreme case. If I have a house and just enough income to cover all my needs and wants (including retirement savings), then depending on my attitude an extra $1000 per year might have no effect at all - I have nothing I want to spend it on and nothing to save for.

But losing my home would still be devastating. So the utility value of the $1000 per year for the rest of my life is low or none, but the utility value of the previously earned money I would lose from losing my house is high.

Thankfully it can be turned off, and it stays off.

"1236 800", "1236 + 800", etc. also do it, but 1236800 does not. The two numbers have to be separated and in that order.

It'd be interesting to know why.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37983226

Points: 8

# Comments: 9

It's high on my list of things to see in the US when I next get a chance to spend some time there (which could be several years away so I hope it keeps going strong).

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34322033

Points: 566

# Comments: 287

Some people just do not work this way - maybe it's being somewhere on the autism spectrum, but whatever the cause, some people need to take a more methodical approach to do this.

I think what this blog post shows is that such an approach really can result in true friendships.

It's a bit like online dating I suppose. That idea is abhorrent to some (or used to be - the stigma has reduced considerably over time), but when it works, there's nothing preventing the resulting relationship from being as genuine as one that started any other way.

Edit: don't know how the similar sibling comment didn't appear to me when I was writing this, since it's from 4 hours ago and I loaded the page less than one hour ago...

Two transactions are happening at the same time. Your "sales" revenue account is going up (Credit) by $2 and your cash asset account is going up (Debit) by the same $2. That is the first balanced transaction.

The second transaction is that your inventory asset account is going down (Credit) by $0.50 as you have less inventory now, and an expense account called "Cost of Goods Sold" is Debited by the same $0.50.

Your profit gets calculated on demand. There are two ways to do it, both yielding the same result. You can look at revenue minus expenses over a period, giving $2 sales minus $0.50 cost of goods sold = $1.50 profit for the period. Or, you can look at how your equity (assets minus liabilities) has changed over that period. In this example, no liabilities have changed and your assets (bank account) have increased by $1.50 because bank has gone up by $2 while inventory has gone down by $0.50.

A past workplace of mine has used this approach.

The register is of course just a normal relational database.

One key to the success, though, is a large and mature body of legislation and processes to ensure that the register really is always correct.

I hope that they choose to reopen or that it can be purchased and turned into a more sustainable operation. I would gladly donate at least $1000 to such a cause if a viable proposal could be formed...

The law that makes this material objectionable is the same one that makes child pornography illegal, and it should be obvious that it wouldn't work very well if each video involving sex with children had to be classified as objectionable before it became illegal.

The criteria are here:

https://www.dia.govt.nz/Censorship-Objectionable-and-Restric...