diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'blog')
| -rw-r--r-- | blog/normal.org | 43 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | blog/voting.org | 31 |
2 files changed, 57 insertions, 17 deletions
diff --git a/blog/normal.org b/blog/normal.org new file mode 100644 index 0000000..ccb40ac --- /dev/null +++ b/blog/normal.org @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@ +#+title: Reconstructing Postmodernism +#+author: Preston Pan +#+description: +#+html_head: <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../style.css" /> +#+html_head: <link rel="apple-touch-icon" sizes="180x180" href="/apple-touch-icon.png"> +#+html_head: <link rel="icon" type="image/png" sizes="32x32" href="/favicon-32x32.png"> +#+html_head: <link rel="icon" type="image/png" sizes="16x16" href="/favicon-16x16.png"> +#+html_head: <link rel="manifest" href="/site.webmanifest"> +#+html_head: <link rel="mask-icon" href="/safari-pinned-tab.svg" color="#5bbad5"> +#+html_head: <meta name="msapplication-TileColor" content="#da532c"> +#+html_head: <meta name="theme-color" content="#ffffff"> +#+html_head: <meta name="viewport" content="width=1000; user-scalable=0;" /> +#+language: en +#+OPTIONS: broken-links:t + +* Introduction +In the collective subconscious there is this idea of the "norm" -- a +set of expected cultural attitudes and beliefs that other people hold +in any given society. This idea is used to analyze hierarchical +structures found in society, manifest in concepts like the patriarchy, +queer rights, black liberation, and others. There are many frameworks +that include all of the above as subframeworks and synthesize them in +some way, but often they have a couple ideas in common: that the +concepts that implicitly infect our society in some way via some +hierarchical order are often unjustified and could be dissolved +without much loss. I propose the following: that the conclusions +presented (that often social hierarchies are unjustified) are true +/in some sense/, but that the real story is more complicated. I posit +that our inability to solve the problem of society and our treatment +of minorities isn't a /problem of society/, but rather a framing problem. + +* The Bleak Culture +Our current society is broken. This is a view shared by a vast +majority of people, but many people hold this exact view for a +multitude of reasons. I hold this view because I believe that no +current cultural narrative solves the problem of our "current +generation". The progressive narrative posits that our problems in +society are highly linked with our inability to cope with social +inequalities, often treating minorities and, often times, regular +people poorly in favor of those with high status. The conservative +answer to culture is that we must turn back, back to something that +has been shown to work in the past. + diff --git a/blog/voting.org b/blog/voting.org index eff2ec0..fcb6db5 100644 --- a/blog/voting.org +++ b/blog/voting.org @@ -19,20 +19,17 @@ In this article I endorse a system that has been tried out before, but has been argue that it has game theoretic foundations that make it superior to other kinds of voting systems. ** The Model -Let us assume that there is a small probability that you can swing the election $$ \rho $$, and a cost to voting; that -is to say, it takes some amount of time, which has opportunity cost associated with it to vote, which we -will call $$ \alpha $$. Let us assume that there is a high /reward/ in swinging the vote; that is to say, if you were -the one that swings the vote, your vote is worth some high monetary value. Let $$ \beta $$ be the median price of swinging. -Let $$ n $$ be the number of people voting, and let the weight of each vote be equal between all participants. -Let the choice of candidate between all voters be binary; voting for one candidate mutually excludes you from -voting for another, and there are two candidates (this is to simply the model; you will see that this does not -lose generality). Then, let us model the expected value of voting for singular individuals. - -For a given person, the probability that your vote swings (or at least ties) depends on the probability that -$$ x = \frac{n - 1}{2} $$, where $ x $$ is the number of people that vote for your candidate. The probability -density function for the probability that $$ m $$ people vote for your candidate we'll call $$ f $$. We will assume -it is binomial, and you might expect it to be closer to 50/50 most of the time, but that is pretty hard to model. -We will therefore compensate by modeling it more accurately afterwards. For now, we assume all participants have -a 50% chance to pick either candidate. -\begin{align*} -\end{align*} +Let us assume there is a small probability of swinging the +election $$ \rho $$, and a large reward for winning the election $$ W $$. +Let us assume that there are two candidates, and the probability of +voting for a single candidate is 50%. Therefore, the final probability +distribution for the number of votes each candidate gets is binomial, +centered around the mean outcome (which is the outcome where there are +an equal amount of votes on each side, and we can count the number of +/red/ votes only; let's let $$ k $$ represent the number of red votes). +Let's remind ourselves of the binomial distribution: +\begin{align} + P(X = k) = { n \choose k } p^{k}(1 - p)^{n - k} +\end{align} +where $$ n $$ is the number of samples, and $$ k $$ is the observed +number. Now, we can calculate the probability |