@L3dpen
@lemmy.mlThrough a postcolonialist lens this is pretty clever. Use of civilized as a term to excuse the racist and expansionist actions of one’s own country, expansion which happens to have coincided with railways being central to industrial power. Now the colonized are civilized, are we the barbarians?
Unironically thinking like that is the real ape-brained behavior.
Hey, thank you so much for the wall of text!
Yes, most of what you mentioned is what I was vaguely including with the term “YA.” I’ve read a lot of it so I’m very inured to the silly tropes and unlikely and dramatic deus ex machinas. It’s great to hear your negatives because I’m seeing my own blind spots!
I think your criticism is valid. I don’t think it’d be correct to call any impression-based criticism invalid. Doesn’t mean one can’t also learn from it. Additionally, the negatives might make sense in context of it being YA, but that doesn’t make them weightless imo.
I liked the second book the least by far, but maybe it’ll be different for you. I’m sorry the BBEG wasn’t up to snuff, I was absolutely convinced. Maybe books 3/4 will do it but it’s mostly in the same vein. I’m glad you still enjoyed it!
I’m not familiar with Hollow Knight, but if you say there’s similarity maybe I should be…
Like, for example, we could assume that it should be a space with discrete topology of some relevant cardinality. [...] Not sure what you mean by that, as each vote x
iis generally not a function or a similar structure
Yeah that was badly written, sorry. I was taking the xi's as well-defined preference-based utility functions, so "i is xi important". That's not even continuous unless one could say "how much of our resources will be spent on i," which is a simplification itself. Maybe instead of issues having functions ki describing all possible choices regarding an issue? By limit I meant someone saying "i is infinitely important."
Anyway, I think it's possible to build a reasonable, continuous, preference model, depending on what the set of topics/issues looks like. Whether the properties required of the set of issues would be reasonable... I think not. I think one would end up with something maybe not discrete but certainly not continuous. Hence the second paragraph in my previous comment.
Arrow’s theorem
I've never heard of this. Just off the first sentence on Wikipedia, I'd question the existence of independent alternatives. It looks like non-dictatorship is defined to be ordering invariant?
I feel like the preference space assumption was reasonable? Effectively asking "how important is x_i" for every issue i and then normalizing the result. Works at the limits, too, if something is considered infinitely important.
It does depend on how one asks about the preferences. Given a different question one might get a non-complete or non-transitive preference function. Also I think that if there were dependent preferences (e.g. more roads, but only if work-from-home isn't available) then that wouldn't be continuous? Cause the preference for one would jump with the sign change of the other. Continuity might even be harmful.
Honestly I just hate it because it's a rather unmathematical approach to say "voting is the problem" and not "our definition of fair voting is flawed."
As someone who studied econ, I feel like I should take offense ;D
Degenerate, in slang more commonly degen, is more or less a term for a low-life or morally repugnant behavior. It seems to have been picked up by the stock market gambling community (which is kinda funny in this context, didn't know that), but I recall it being a thing over a decade ago in the circles that community is enmeshed with, such as 4chan. Was used to denounce gays, masturbation, that kind of thing.
“Often try,” more like almost always. There isn’t a word in economics that I’ve regularly heard used correctly. Not a fucking one.
My favorite, which is not from Econ: degenerate.
Or you could read the article and see that’s not even remotely the issue, and the title is as per usual misleading.
Germany planned 8 billion eur financial support for Ukraine this year. That’s been used up. So, no more monetary (!) aid unless they find some spare change in the budget, which they won’t.
And to preempt the next headline: Germany’s spending next year on Ukraine will be halved, yes… Because there’re plans for an international fund.
Also while “Olaf” is the one naying further spending, he’s not doing so independently of the ruling coalition. He has little agency.
Obligatory fuck Lindner and fuck the FDP.
No worries, I don't expect anyone to remember random internet stranger number seven thousand one hundred and eight. But, just in case =D