And it reveals another (probably unsolvable?) UX problem with quadratic voting: it takes so much longer to allocate votes by comparison to a thumbs-up / thumbs-down vote.
For myself, I did a pass through the issues, supporting or opposing each issue with a single vote. Then, I did another pass to add additional votes to each issue in proportion to how much I cared, while carefully paying attention to how many issues were left to be voted on, and my remaining "budget" of votes. Then, I did a final series of passes to rebalance everything, trying to make it as reflective of my positions as possible, while using as many votes as I could (so as not to leave any crumbs of democracy on the table, so to speak).
The whole thing was actually really complex, and not done in "linear time" like a traditional ballot. And it wasn't because I thought more about the issues, but purely because the rules of the system introduced so much more overhead.
Not saying I dislike the idea of quadratic voting, just that you can really feel the difference.
The large number of votes (100) and issues (10) seems to reduce the issue around not being able to "spend" all your votes as well. When I've only got 25 it feels particularly wasteful to not be able to spend 7. But with 100 and 10 choices I really had a lot more degrees of freedom.
I run a small ranking app and have previously landed on Schulze method for calculating the rankings. http://blog.forcerank.it/counting-votes-is-hard I'm going to have to think about adding quadratic as an option though.
For the example given, it seems like the majority criterion is actually not desirable.
Picking a talk topic that everyone will like a lot is a better outcome than picking another slightly preferred by most but completely uninteresting to the rest.
Too many people are missing the point of actions like this. You want to make lives of everyone in Russia more unpleasant to send the signal that a war can’t be an easy PR win. If you start a war, it should suck for your citizens, even if they are watching the news from a safe distance. If your leader starts a war, your life will become worse and you will be poorer personally. Sure, this is less effective for authoritarian countries, but is still useful.
Of course most Github users from Russia aren’t guilty, and many of them are already against the war. Good for them! But that’s not the point.
White collar workers just flee the country: See Venezuela, Iran, etc. Even Russian Revolution itself is an example of this trend.
When white collar workers become "inconvenient" they get purged as enemies of the people. See Pol Pot's reign of terror in Cambodia. He had brutally purged roughly 25% of his own population, far more in relative numbers than Stalin, Hitler or Mao did, yet he still had been in power for decades, even after Vietnam invaded after massive refugee crisis.
Iran had violent protests in the past few years, but the protesters just got killed and that was it.
The agreement is more of a hybrid cloud arrangement with AWS Outposts.
FTA:
>Core to Nasdaq’s move to AWS will be AWS Outposts, which extend AWS infrastructure, services, APIs, and tools to virtually any datacenter, co-location space, or on-premises facility. Nasdaq plans to incorporate AWS Outposts directly into its core network to deliver ultra-low-latency edge compute capabilities from its primary data center in Carteret, NJ.
They are also starting small, with Nasdaq MRX
This is much less about moving NASDAQ (or other exchanges) to be fully owned/maintained by Amazon, and more about wanting to take advantage of development tooling and resources and services AWS provides, but within the confines of an owned/maintained data center. I'm sure as this partnership grows, racks and racks will be in Amazon's data centers too, but this is a hybrid approach.
I would also bet a significant amount of money that when NASDAQ does go full "cloud" (or hybrid, as it were), it won't be in the same US-east region co-mingling with the rest of the consumer web, but with its own redundant services and connections and networking stack.
NASDAQ wants to modernize its infrastructure but it absolutely doesn't want to offload it to a cloud provider. That's why it's a hybrid partnership.
It’s Chromium-based, so, of course, it’s slow. Specifically, search is excruciatingly slow, removing an album from your library redraws the whole page, and—most frustratingly— as soon as you lose internet connection, your perfectly nice and readable page get replaced with “Artist pages are not available offline”. It’s a list of tracks and albums which is updated (at most, on average) several times a year, why require connection to continue showing it?
Not Mac-specific, but extremely weird: sometimes Release Radar playlist has tracks by wrong artists with the same name. I don’t think a recommendation model would use names instead of IDs, so it probably means that track was first ascribed to a wrong artist, and that’s... even worse?
I think you have a problem with your Spotify installation. Maybe try removing it and re-installing it?
I use Spotify all the time on my 2016 normal-powered Macbook Pro and I don't experience any of your performance problems. Everything's lightning fast including search, and I've got 10,000's of tracks saved in 100's of playlists.
There’s a good reason why doctors have difficulties with rare diseases—which is, of course, the rarity itself.
> In medical school, aspiring doctors spend a few minutes at most on these relatively unusual conditions.
It would be unethical to spend a lot of time studying these conditions while many more people suffer from the more frequent ones.
Sooner than later, we’ll be able to solve, say, depression reliably via pills or vaccines or whatever, and then more rare diseases will be studied much better (likewise, there was little point in spending much time on depression when smallpox was around).
You don’t need perfect measurements to make decisions.
Comparing times between browser-defined events in the same browser opening the same site on the same day is about the most apples-to-apples as you can get.
It’s two days if you live in the US. I don’t, so the CD will have to travel for weeks to finally get stuck at the customs in the airport—and CDs are much more fragile than MP3s or FLACs. Moreover, I don‘t have a single device to put this CD into.
The point about “text is too big” is really, really strange—using 12pt in print is okay, but you should never use it for a screen—everyone's reading from the screen from a much bigger distance, and resolutions are getting higher and higher.
I frequently see texts in prints though, especially headings, that start overlapping with other things around. This seems way more common than what I would like. Once in a while, believe it or not, all the characters print on the top of each other for headings. All this is such a mess.
