But filtered coffee is the most flavorful! No other method extracts the subtle nuances as well!
P.s. I know it's subjective, just cringe on this claim of "the most flavorful" starting with espresso. :)
Yep, every method brings out a different nuance of coffee flavor, and any true coffee snob will likely own half a dozen or more items for brewing coffee.
You're literally saying "an airline, booking a flight 6 months out, 6 days out, or 6 hours out" is not "charging two people for the same route differently", completely missing the point of alex43578's excellent question.
I'm not. alex43578 was shifting the goalposts from the point cogman10 was making; I acknowledged what he said, but it was besides the point. An airline charging differently depending on the time ahead of flight is sensible. An airline charging differently depending on the buyer's home address is discrimination.
You said "charging two people for the same route differently" is bad: airlines do that constantly and that's why there's dozens of fare changes, fare buckets, sales, codeshares, etc.
Regardless, the bigger point is that businesses already have a ton of levers to move for pricing: sales, loyalty programs, and regular price adjustments. None of those are considered discrimination. Why does the buyer's home address fall into this protected class; particularly for any service that involves transport, delivery, etc to that address? There's a clear relevancy of the address to the cost of a service based around that location.
> sales, loyalty programs, and regular price adjustments. None of those are considered discrimination. Why does the buyer's home address fall into
Because everything you listed applies to everyone equally! Assuming a normal loyalty program anyone can join.
> any service that involves transport, delivery, etc to that address
Shopping at a grocery store doesn't involve that. But sure most forms of charging for transport based on destination are fine. That's different from charging two people differently to go the same place at the same time. "Home address" is just an easy piece of personal info to mention.
(An exception to that most would be like the hospital example, charging more for that specific location inside the general area because the buyer seems desperate.)
I suppose you are misunderstanding me on purpose, but let me try again in very clear terms anyway: Offering the same service or product (a specific flight if you will, a chunk of butter of the same brand in the same store at the same time) to two independent customers at different prices based on prior knowledge about them unrelated to the specific good or service is fundamentally unjust.
What you are referring to is 'price discrimination'[1]. @alex43578 is correct in his examples. In the 'Uber/Lyft' example, his metric for service similarity in the case of a ride to the airport vs. the middle of nowhere can be seen in the distance driven. The problem is that arguments can always be made on why pricing one demographic vs another makes business sense.
In the case of Uber/Lyft, the company can say a ride to the middle of nowhere costs more than a hotspot destination because the odds of finding someone hailing another ride from there are low. This would mean the driver would have to spend more on gas picking up their next customer. Although this seems reasonable, it's probabilistic in nature. This may also not be the case, but the company must price this risk to keep their drivers happy. Well what of the case where the destination is a dangerous neighborhood where the driver feels like their life will be in danger? How do we price the risk then? And that says nothing about the possible mismatch of perception between the seller and the customer.
How about if a grocery store sells goods at a higher price to customers in lower income areas because they notice that it lowers the number of high income area customers to the point they make less profit? Is it right for that store to raise the price for identifiably lower income area customer to make up for the lost profit?
> Offering the same service or product (a specific flight if you will, a chunk of butter of the same brand in the same store at the same time) to two independent customers at different prices based on prior knowledge about them unrelated to the specific good or service is fundamentally unjust
Your statement includes things like loyalty programs and memberships. Presenting these credentials at checkout means customers are willingly giving the company "prior knowledge about them" (that they've shopped at the store before and how much they're willing to spend) unrelated to the *specific* food or service they're purchasing. Should these practices be allowed?
The point of this reply isn't to say what should or shouldn't be allowed, it's to show that I believe the issue is more nuanced than you can account for in your statement of what constitutes unjust business practices.
Why is it unjust? It’s absolutely the store or individual’s choice to charge what they want to who they want, assuming that they aren’t discriminating against a protected class.
In your example, why aren’t all prices then fixed between different stores to ensure justice? Whole Foods shouldn’t be allowed to charge more than Discount Food Bin for the same can of beans, and WF in Oakland shouldn’t charge less than WF in Marin.
> by someone who maybe isn't so great at clear communications
I don't think that's fair. If you're familiar with the programming language, his writing is fairly clear. If you're not, maybe you're just not in his target audience.
IOW, optimizing his text for people familiar with the language is probably a better choice than teaching the language, which would distract him from his goal.
That's exactly my understanding as well. This is, essentially, the LLM hallucinating user messages nested inside its outputs. FWIWI I've seen Gemini do this frequently (especially on long agent loops).
I don't know if it's niche, but I like making granola for my friends and family. I give them a big jar and tell them free refills are included ("just bring me the empty jar"). I get pretty good nuts and tend to make largish batches (around 2 kg), and, because of the refills, I get a good sense of who appreciates it — always happy to make more for them. My recipe is here: https://alejo.ch/365
I got into designing my own knitting patterns. I enjoy that I can customize everything — the yarn material, color (including marling, helix knitting, double knitting), yarn weight, needle size (e.g., resulting in "airy" vs "packed" textures), knit textures (e.g., stockinette, linen, miss, etc.), construction process (e.g., can I figure out a way to knit in the round vs flat?), cables, gradual increases/decreases, selvedge/cord, desired ease, etc..
Sorry, I don't have time. See https://www.mathemaknitter.com/ for her (sadly neglected) blog that also links to her ravelry account and patterns.
Mostly the conceptual evolution was:
Knitting patterns have a lot of numbers with mathematical relations between them. You could keep track of them by hand, but spreadsheets are already an improvement. Especially when you want to make edits to earlier parts of the pattern. Well, spreadsheets aren't too bad to write, but they are basically write-only software, impossible to audit. She'd already learned programming in Haskell before, so going from there to using Haskell for making the numbers work out was a small step, conceptually.
How does she keep track of what row she's on, as she knits? I wonder if she'd be interested in specifying her patterns in a format my knitting software (visualization) could consume.
I'm very well aware of parse.y, if you look into the syntaqlite code, you'd find it's a critical part of how the whole "source extraction" mentioned in the article works [1]
To be clear when I say "formal specification", I'm not just talking about the formal grammar rules but also how those interpreted in practice. Something closer to the ECMAScript specification (https://ecma-international.org/publications-and-standards/st...).
Looks pretty cool. I think it's great that you support light/dark mode. FWIWI, I'm also a huge fan of Excalidraw.
I wanted to ask you: is there's a reason you use a separate svg file for each (light/dark) mode?
A single SVG file using CSS can change it's own colors based on the user's preference. I have an example here: http://alejo.ch/3jj - the 3 plots should honor your mode (I put the generator code here: https://github.com/alefore/mini_svg)
Just figure I'd ask. If you have a good reason for using separate files, I'd love to hear it (because it probably would also apply to what I'm doing). :)
Edit: To expand on this, I dislike light/dark toggles. If I have dark mode on, seeing a bright screen and having to search for a toggle is jarring. Just show me the colours according to my preference!
reply