Comment by lantalia on Models predicting significant violence in the US? · 2020-10-25T20:09:09.181Z · LW · GW

Baseline rates of deaths from political violence are a bit tricky to pin down, but a process of elimination on homicides (YMMV, depending on which political acts you normalize as, on balance, apolitical. For various reasons, I tend to exclude DV, and theft, but include racism and police violence as political) gets us to 1k to 5k per year for the past decade, so, assigning an expectation of 1% for breaching 5k for the next year seems low.

We are likely operating on different definitions what constitutes political acts

Comment by lantalia on Billionaire Economics · 2020-07-28T06:14:31.032Z · LW · GW

The US unsheltered population is around 200k, the cheapest rent I can find in a city is ~$500 a month, so, assuming (incorrectly), you can actually provide shelter at that rate in the places people actually are, you get about 1.2 billion a year more than we currently spend, ignoring what that will do to the market, efficiencies of scale, tiny houses, and other options. This also only deals with the unsheltered (there are, probably, another 400k sheltered but homeless), and doesn't necessarily include utilities. If 30 year fixed plus maintenance is the presumed amortization that rent is going against, then ~36 billion may be able to uplift the current unsheltered population, provided people are willing to be relocated. This, unfortunately, misses that a lot of the homeless population is only temporarily homeless already, due to section 8, public housing, etc, so it isn't entirely clear that the 36 billion would actually be more than a hiccup.

The next problem is accessing the money. The billionaires come in a few different categories, based on whether their wealth is primarily from income (kleptocrats, oligarchs, oil barons, etc) or from static appreciated investments (tech company founders, etc). To some extent, we don't want the 2nd group to attempt to liquidate their wealth, as currently, said wealth is, to the extent it exists, doing useful work, and liquidating it would be sucking a LOT of resources out of the economy, which may make sense if done gradually, with a clear plan. If done quickly, it is likely to devalue itself, crash a bunch of other things, and likely be illegal.

There are other problems, that said, there are places where things could be greatly improved, and it would make sense for governmental bodies to execute some of these plans where it would be efficient and compassionate to do so. There are a lot of people that it would be cheaper to provide housing for, than the current cost in services they incur due to not having shelter.

Comment by lantalia on Why such low detected rates of COVID-19 in children? · 2020-03-16T23:16:23.733Z · LW · GW

This is a WAG, but maybe Vitamin D fortified milk?

Comment by lantalia on What will be the big-picture implications of the coronavirus, assuming it eventually infects >10% of the world? · 2020-02-26T18:16:45.951Z · LW · GW

One note: China's policies will be seen as a failure due to their initial denial and persecution of the medical professionals attempting to call attention to the issue, they have already undermined any response's success or failure

Comment by lantalia on [Link] Did AlphaStar just click faster? · 2019-01-29T02:01:03.855Z · LW · GW

Above and beyond it's APM, it was doing things humans physically can't do with the camera in order to micro perfectly on three effective screens at once, with effectively infinite mouse speed, and no input lag

Basically, #2 in the article dominates with how it won