Kara Schechtman
banner
utopianturtle.top
Kara Schechtman
@utopianturtle.top
she/her 🌈 PhD student in cs at Princeton researching ethics of algorithmic decision-making
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetry-news/63112/the-ford-faberge-by-marianne-moore
I like to imagine the alternate universe where all is the same, but for a government effort to engineer a weather machine that slightly perturbs the Redwood City climate, knocking it down from top billing in the climatological survey, and the slogan of the city is "climate worse by government curse"
January 17, 2026 at 8:48 PM
Glad to find you on Bluesky :-) I hope you're doing wonderfully!

There is continuity in the turtle interest--I wrote an essay in senior year about Marianne Moore: www.listsofnote.com/p/utopian-tu...

My latest rabbit related interest is hare snails as an icon illustrating "festina lente"
August 7, 2025 at 3:43 PM
Omg! Related rad variant I saw in the airport, is a kids' suitcase with a scooter attached. Maybe the general lesson is they should start making adult versions of kids suitcases
July 27, 2025 at 7:58 PM
Reposted by Kara Schechtman
We have more on how the administration is gutting food safety programs and making foodborne illnesses more likely on our explainer: unbreaking.org/issues/food-...
Food Safety — Unbreaking
How the administration is breaking the government, and what that means for all of us.
unbreaking.org
July 18, 2025 at 3:28 PM
2. w is a big wrong: consider a set W' = W-{w} \cup {w*}. By inductive hypothesis, it could not be that W', which is of size n+1, fixed any wrongs. But since big wrongs are always wrong, committing w could not fix W' and again n+2 wrongs do not make n+1 rights.

Qed
May 10, 2025 at 1:44 PM
1. w is a little wrong: there are at least 2 little wrongs in W (since w was maximally wrong). Combining them into one macro-wrong m, let W' = W - {w, w'} \cup {w*}. |W'|=n so by i.h., m does not fix it. But as W' and m = W and w* then w* could not fix W either, so n+2 wrongs don't fix n+1 wrongs.
May 10, 2025 at 1:43 PM
suppose that n+1 wrongs does not ever fix n wrongs. consider any set of n+1 wrongs W and any additional n+2th wrong w*. Order W by wrongness and pick max w\in W. It is well known there is a threshold of wrongness at which a wrong graduates from a "little" to a "big" wrong. So consider two cases:
May 10, 2025 at 1:43 PM