Question Time: Week Two
And we've already got a couple of new ones
Just when I was wondering whether I had enough paid subscribers to justify making this a weekly feature, Jackson Houser posted two new questions in the comments on last week’s QT announcement. Here’s his entry:
So, it is Wednesday again, the Ides of March this time, and time once again for questions (which, I know, you may or may not answer). First, a housekeeping point: I am posting this comment at your original announcement about Question Time, rather than continuing the thread from your response. If there is a better place for questions (or, I suppose: Questions) please let us know. Now, for the Question(s). Here are two that you may wish to consider: Q1. You know, I'm sure, of the odd story that a valuable contributor to the development of the Oxford English Dictionary was institutionalized in an asylum for the criminally insane. I mention it because you and others have lamented the susceptibility of Chat GPT to "hallucinations." Should we treat Chat GPT and similar entities like the OED contributor: 'a genius! But, alas, also insane.' Q2. You have written publicly about some of your, um, medical adventures. I still remember the stunningly casual way you revealed what would have been treated by others as a major announcement. What lessons can we learn from your experiences with vision correction, organ donation, and cancer treatment?
So I might answer these, or I might answer something else. Please post questions in the comments (paid subscribers only). Answers on Monday.
Is it hard to manage large sums of money? I ask because it seems odd to me that SVB depositors apparently kept way way more money than can be insured by FDIC in this one bank. Why? I’m glad that the contagion will probably not spread as far as it could have, but I can’t help but think that the thousands of start-ups that used the bank failed in their fiduciary duties to their organizations. And why must all of their deposits be reimbursed rather than a percentage? Not even a trim? Does this situation indicate that perhaps many of these start-ups were not worth saving?
cPlastic is considered bad for the environment but why? Until the ocean dumping saga, which does not have any connection to the US, it was mainly a mantra that plastic fills up our trash storage sites (land fills), but we have plenty of space for landfills and for most of the country that is where our trash goes, and contrary to common belief, nothing decomposes in properly constructed landfills. Like plastics, most everything we dump will stay there forever.
So my question is, since environmental dogma wants to sequester carbon to keep it out of the atmosphere, why isn't plastic waste the ideal way to do that? A pound of polyethylene or polypropylene is 86% carbon. Put it away forever in a big plastic bag, which is what modern landfills are, forever.