kelvintran's comments

Ordermark | ordermark.com | Los Angeles, CA | Denver, CO | REMOTE | Full-Stack/Backend Engineers | Full-Time

Apply by sending CV to [email protected], happy to answer questions kelvin dot tran at the same domain.

We're building a platform that helps restaurants manage online food ordering services (eg, UberEats, DoorDash). The platform aggregates orders received from disparate services and allows restaurants to change their menus in one single location.

Python, Django/FastAPI, Celery, Typescript/Javascript, React & Redux, AWS.

https://jobs.lever.co/getordermark

Am an attorney.

You could create a system that'd help you file SCC complaints quickly, but to have it detailed enough to pass the defendant lawyer's complaints about the deficiencies in your documents would be difficult.

The size of that problem, however, decreases with the narrowness of the subject matter you want to cover/make claims about. If it were a 'Sue Equifax For The 2017 Data Breach' service, then it might work (the whole point about class actions being that they're similar - commonality, typicality etc - enough)

"A.J. Daulerio, author of the 2012 story on Hulk Hogan, is out of work and unable to pay the $100,000 in punitive damages awarded by the jury."

Odd that Gawker wasn't (isn't?) covering its journalists under its libel insurance policy, and is now relying on its failure to do so to justify publishing arguably libelous, or at least close to libelous, material.

Why are there so many separate actions? Seems somewhat inefficient and the exact scenario for which the class action was designed

Interesting that EA distributes importance of skill differently for right and left sided players (eg, passing 57% for right mids, and 41% for left mids, while dribbling is more important for left mids than right mids (54% v 38%)).

Might reflect impact of actual players (Robben being a right-sided left footed impact winger).

This is how I was taught it (or understood I was taught it) - at law school, so it might have been dumbed down.

The impossibility is the impossibility of ensuring rational (transitive) outcomes amongst ranked preferences and adhering to a set of fair and democratic norms.

A rational transitive outcomes is one in which votes result in option A being preferred over option B and option B being preferred over option C, such that A is preferred over C (eg, A > B > C). Option A is known as the Condorcet winner.

But there may be cases where the vote yields no Condorcet winner (eg, A > B > C > A). This is illustrated by the following table:

Preferences Voter 1 Choc Vanil Strwb Voter 2 Vanil Strwb Choc Voter 3 Strwb Choc Vanil

Two voters prefer C over V and two prefer V over S, but two also prefer S over C.

To ensure transitivity, we can introduce voting rules, but it is impossible to introduce rules that do not violate the fair and democratic norms (referred to as the pre-specified criteria in the Wikipedia article: unrestricted domain, non-dictatorship, Pareto efficiency, and independence of irrelevant alternatives).

I've never used the Twitter API or Meerkat, but it seems that the 'choke' could be bypassed by scraping followers/following info from the publicly accessible profile pages of users.

Eg, sign on to Meerkat via Twitter, get username, scrape user's Twitter profile page for connected users, check if these connected users are on Meerkat, ask the user which of them he/she wants to connect with on Meerkat, then add on Meerkat.

Am I missing something? (I'm sure I am.)