marmaduke · HackerTrans

2 lata temudiscuss

Yep that’s my reading too. I like to see it from a dynamical systems perspective: as a system approaches an attractor, the phase flow slows down, while the wall time marches on steadily. If we consider the “perspective” of the system, which is wall time divided by phase flow, we get the time speeding up part.

marmaduke

7 lat temudiscuss

> Uh oh. Unseen Risk Fallacy

a bit off topic, but couldn't identifying fallacies in arguments be automated? how much better would the discussion be if comments were labeled with likelihood of fallacy?

marmaduke

7 lat temudiscuss

I think you have a good point but chose to place in response to the wrong comment.

marmaduke

7 lat temudiscuss

Not just individual scientists but entire labs.

marmaduke

7 lat temudiscuss

Couldn't à hypothetical fuse fs emulate any file based store for email?

marmaduke

7 lat temudiscuss

What do you propose for a shared file system?

marmaduke

7 lat temudiscuss

> the entire model of NFS is arguably wrong to begin with

On local networks (everything attached to a single switch) with good hardware, it is reliable, and soft/intr is the worse choice among others.

To wit NFS is one of the commonly supported VM storage options (libvirt, VMware, etc).

marmaduke

9 lat temudiscuss

That was my reaction. How to ELI5 the risk in multitenant VM environment? It could steal passwords

marmaduke

10 lat temudiscuss

Developing a statistical threshold requires some null hypothesis, which very often takes Gaussian or linear form. The paper on which the method is based likely states their assumptions clearly, allowing their result to pass peer review.

Papers merely employing some method are rarely reviewed by the same peers as those of the methods papers, and often neither aware of or state the assumptions of the method.

This is how this happens, at least in neuroscience. You can look down on it and judge, but neuroscience has not really found its Kuhnian paradigm yet, so be nice.