What if you allow co-induction, and don't require termination, but merely productivity?
It should be easy to show that your DFS continues to do meaningful work, in that it won't visit old nodes again
You can replicate the STROBE API with many other primitives, it's just less efficient. STROBE is a nice API over the capabilities of a Duplex construction, and so emulating that with other means is awkward.
Compare the number of the calls to the compression function vs the duplex construction
I still don't quite get the motivation for keeping Alaskan as a through street, if the motivation was ferry access. As a result, the vast majority of the people on Alaskan are just avoiding the toll tunnel.
A couple issues with this theory:
- there's often a myopic focus on impact during construction (traffic theory of everything)
- preference seems to be doled out through restrictions of upzoning, which reduces land value (but, it can preserve property value, sometimes)
"But do we actually know that"
Yeah, formalizing that is difficult. Intuitively, something akin to a game-theoretic interpretation of logic would work.
That's way too much machinery for this book though.
I think the conundrum is also solved in theory by not being content with "mere existence" but rather interpreting "exists" in a constructive way. I.e. if someone says that an algorithm exists finding a collision in SHA3, they should give it to you
I can barely write a background section in 20 pages
kingcounty.gov/en/dept/asse...
It's budget / mill based, so a drop in property values would just change the distribution of taxation, not the intake.
eprint.iacr.org/2020/1456
This paper made me see it as a bit more of an interesting attack, in that they actually found examples of a ciphertext which would decrypt to two valid files with different keys.
It does remain a bit contrived to imagine key confusion, but software can be very buggy.
If you use the sales tax to fund addiction treatment, surely that makes it highly progressive, no?
Not yet afaict
support.signal.org/hc/en-us/art... One folders are more widespread that can help, + not needing to share your phone number to connect
i am so sorry but if you live in the pnw you have no business having palm trees in your yard
Well, at least it has sidewalks at all!
There's also an extent to which, for a strong property, it can obviously eliminate many programs because it's clear that it doesn't hold, but for weaker properties, there's still a chance it will in some weird way.
I don't think it's a contradiction, because proving weaker properties, contingent on all the edge cases not eliminated by something stronger, actually involves proving more.
notes.cronokirby.com/Posts/Bridgi...
I wrote a short blog post about how I'd like to see us evolve bridges towards internalizing risk, rather than passing it on to users. Ideally, bridging risk should not be mitigated by having users be aware of each bridging action, gauging it themselves.
pug in a kayak
pugs hair in the wind in a kayak
Tired pug
pug kayak -> pug sleep
It's called "urban planning" and it's a science
"Cryptography makes everything a key management problem" is actually a profoundly optimistic statement.
This is incredible! I'm seething with jealousy.
Typography is one of the world's most pernicious infohazards.
Cities being purely "profit"-oriented is probably not ideal, but we also want decision makers in cities to actually like the idea of their city being an increasingly desirable place to live with more and more residents!
The combination of these factors lead to a city looking at a vacant lot in the middle of a growing neighborhood and thinking (as a collective hive-mind) "man, this would be a gigantic hassle to develop" instead of "look how much value (money) we could get by improving this neighborhood"
Beyond these elements, property valuation is completely out of wack, often being very out of date, inconsistently applied, etc. There's also the Georgist gripe about property and not only land being taxed. Cities are also exempt from property taxes (at least, in WA, c.f. RCW 84.36.010)
Often, there are strong legal barriers in place to prevent this absolute value from rising too quickly over the years.
This can make cities not interested in growing the value of their land though.
This is often not well understood, but in most places in the US, property taxes are determined not by a fixed rate, but rather by figuring out how much the locality (city, state government, county, etc.) needs to collect, as an absolute value, which then determines the rate.
Considering this article (www.slowboring.com/p/what-citie...) from @mattyglesias.bsky.social about how the concentrated ownership model can help neighborhoods (as it does for, e.g. Theme Parks, Japanese Rail), I'm starting to think that cities having constant millage is bad.
