Here are two games I played recently: White to play and win. What is interesting is that in both cases the solution involves a sacrifice which I played intuitively, and did not bother to analyze all the way out, because my judgment told me the attack must ultimately be winning. Sure enough, I had to find several clever moves later on in each of the games, but they existed, my intuition was correct. (If you find a different way to win, which certainly exists in at least one of the two games, that’s OK too.)
- A logical gap
- The persecution of Shellie Zimmerman
- Race and Crime in America
- Bayesianity: How Scientists Think About Evidence
- Double Drone Strikes
- NY Times: trials should be about racial history rather than the facts of the case
- Snowden isn’t important, what he leaked is.
- The Zero Tolerance War on Kindergarteners
- Good blogs I recently found
- Legal Tender laws
- Best quote on the Richwine case
- Professional Liars Working Overtime
- An exchange on immigration.
PTT Sailer watch | p… on Occam’s Butterknife The Philosopher on Which majors are smartest… Floccina on Race and Crime in America Santoculto on A logical gap libertascap on Bayesianity: How Scientists Th…