In a similar vein I highly recommend Behind the Curve, which is a documentary about the flat Earth movement. It was a pretty fair film and tried to get to know the people involved in the movement and what it was that motivated them.
It was interesting to see that one of the main figures featured in the documentary started out pretty generically wanting to get into conspiracy theories and started reading up on one after another until he found a particular one that clicked.
Moltbook Valuation & Funding
Deal Type Date Amount Raised to Date Post-Val Status Stage
2. Merger/Acquisition 10-Mar-2026 - - - Announced Startup
1. Early Stage VC 01-Mar-2026 - - - Completed Startup
I think the long term impact of this will be to strengthen the importance of social ties in academic publishing. As it is there are so many papers published in many fields that people tend to filter for papers published by big names and major institutions. But the inevitable torrent of AI slop will overwhelm anyone who is looking for any gems coming from outsiders. I suspect the net effect will be to make it even more important that you join a big name institution in order to be taken seriously.
I have had to train myself out of doing that when recording videos. The best I've managed is that I can do it sometimes, and most of the rest of the time I leave a long enough pause after that I can cleanly edit it off.
Given the mountains, the sun would appear to set when it descends below some altitude angle. Given the equation in the wikipedia article you'd then just solve for the hour angle. (You'd then have to use your latitude to convert the local solar time to Mountain Standard Time.)
Perhaps a rough look-up table for (say) each 10 degrees of azimuth around the observing point that gives the altitude to solve for? Finally a couple of iterations to find what azimuth the Sun will be nearer the actual setting time, perhaps taking the 'flat horizon' setting time as a starting value?
Thank you for the kind words! Yes, I think you're right about the missing factor of rho. And rho^2 is being drawn from a chi-squared distribution, not a chi distribution. (But the mode I stated is correct for a chi-squared distribution --- I must have omitted the squares when typing this up.)
I've found that there can be a lot of randomness for what makes the front page. Not too many people read the "New" page and articles drop off it pretty quickly, so it can be hard for a niche article to attract the handful of votes it needs to appear on the front page. (Though there is a "second chance" feature which helps to ameliorate this issue.) So there's a lot of randomness to what makes it onto the front page.
For instance I submitted an article three times (spaced a year apart). The first two times the article got no upvotes. The third time it got 600+ and hit the top of the front page. It's just a matter of who happens to be looking at the New page at the time.
If someone has less votes and its still something I find interesting, I am more critic of the whole situation to upvote
But if someone already has 400 upvotes and is on the top of the site, I will look more into it with ("woah a lot of people upvoted, lets see why" and then read the comments and some of the comments are really brilliant that it becomes the reason why I upvote the post itself too
I am sure that hackernews doesnt really recommend it but I do feel like its something that I do subconsciously that I have observed and wanted to share. It does feel like random stuff but still in a way which still makes sense for the whole ethos of hackernews.
Mark-to-market can create liquidity crises when coupled with capitalization requirements, though. This can happen in, e.g., bond markets.
Say a bank is sitting on a pile of very safe bonds. If the interest rate suddenly increases, the mark-to-market value of the bonds goes way down. The bank would still expect to get the full value of all the bonds at maturity. But if the bank has to mark-to-market, the current value may be low enough that capitalization requirements force the bank to sell all the bonds in a fire sale. So even though the bank in theory could have held onto the assets and gotten exactly what it had expected from the start, it instead ends up taking a big loss.
I think that's almost what happened to Silicon Valley Bank, except that they weren't required to recapitalize, but all of their customers read their financial disclosures, assumed a mark-to-market loss was an actual loss, and withdrew their money, running the bank.
This article probably omitted it for simplicity, but you would discount the income stream over time. Projected income at the 20 year mark is valued much less than income next year. That helps to account for the uncertainty.
How would this help? If the existing operators refuse to lower rents and leave their spaces vacant then under this scheme no one else can build new spaces which rent at lower rates. You would just be stuck with vacant properties at above-market rates.
It was interesting to see that one of the main figures featured in the documentary started out pretty generically wanting to get into conspiracy theories and started reading up on one after another until he found a particular one that clicked.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behind_the_Curve
reply