MFLoon

Yea it's super neat. More journals/articles should have those to appeal to lay readers.

I agree that the world is a complex system, but I don't actually agree that all or most of my actions as a private individual have wide reaching consequences. If you're below a certain critical threshold of wealth, power, social influence or some combination thereof, it really just doesn't matter what you do, it's the law of large numbers. The butterfly effect is a rare exception in complex systems, not a regularity - COVID Patient 0, for example, took actions that had wide reaching consequences, but I wouldn't consider those actions to have been "fundamentally political". Both the impact and the opportunity cost of the vast majority of my actions or inactions, on the greater world, is close to zero. People trying to convince you that "you can make a difference" in your everyday life as a private citizen by voting, recycling, showing up at the protest, boycotting the right products, etc, are in fact lying - they can, potentially, make a difference by causing a wide enough cross-section of a population to change their behaviors, but you the individual are not acting with wide reaching consequences, you are simply shuffling between indifferent behavioral cohorts which will continue to exist in the same proportions regardless of your individual choices.

I used to be baffled at the use of "SJW" as a pejorative, but comments like this reveal it's aptness to me. It's not the fighting for justice that's negative, it's the adoption of the warrior mentality. Which, ironically, is a perfect reflection of the problem with American policing - viewing the world as a battlefield and anyone not with you as against you. There are no non-combatants in the streets, just as there are none in the ideological trenches. The struggle for order and/or social justice is a totalizing endeavor that demands complete obedience, to the point where non-compliance/apolitical intransigence is treated more harshly than some forms of law-breaking/ideological deviance.

It appears to be a literal troll account - "Peter Weyland" is the villain from the Alien cinematic universe.

Apologies for the somewhat pedantic aside, but I want to point out: "literal Nazi" is a borderline oxymoron. There is no Nazi party, nor is Nazism a coherent political ideology to which one can seriously ascribe. I suppose people who were active members when it still existed can still be considered "literal Nazis", in which case there's probably less than 50 left on earth. But saying that anyone else who claims adherence to Nazism or allegiance to the (completely defunct) Nazi party makes them a literal Nazi actually elevates their status from what it is, which is just a pathetic racist cosplayer.

Was just perusing the Hoon tutorial out of curiosity, and it's wild how alien of a language it is. To my eyes it's like a bastard child of brainfuck and common lisp; look at the "simple Hoon program" they give in section 1.1 as your first introduction to Hoon code https://urbit.org/docs/tutorials/hoon/list-of-numbers/

Also, the interpreter won't parse integer literals without thousands separators (which are periods). JackieChanMindBlown.png

Is it really? It seems like an enormous amount of effort for a prank. 18k commits on the main repo, tens of thousands of words of explanatory blog posts and documentation, etc.

I highly doubt, if they even had a dedicated "security team" at the time the platform was architected as such, that they would have told the rest of the company they "had best-of-breed security". They would have understood their shortcomings and communicated them up the chain of command. And firing them and hiring an outside team of "security experts" to re-architect their system wholesale would be a patently absurd course of action.

The form of responsibility taking you're demanding is actually just business as usual, reactionary scapegoating.

Mine are mostly offers for a pre-approved $250,000 loan, available in less than 48 hours, for my non-existent small business. Curious what stolen mailing list I'm on that makes scammers think I'm a small business owner. Flattering really, that they'd think I have the potential to become one.

relatively minimal resources

Uh, they're the most well capitalized corporation in the world (or hovering in the top 3 plus or minus a few quarters). They have the resources to make it work if they wanted. There are undoubtedly thousands of engineers, hundreds of managers, and at least a handful of execs, working for Apple, lurking in this HN thread today, not because they're unaware of their ongoing sabotage of web standards on iOS, but because they're completely aware of it and want to take the temperature on how their latest kick to the shins of PWAs is going over.

Yea, the build quality is the biggest area it's lacking. I have Lemur from 3 years ago or so (and they still look more or less the same) - and the body is very uninspiring chunky black plastic, and feels flimsy/flexy. The keyboard is fine I suppose, generic chiclet keys which I don't mind at all. But the trackpad is quite mediocre compared to any Macbook.

Strange that App Academy was left out, considering it was one of the earliest (if not the first?) ISA bootcamps. Full disclosure: I attended in 2015, as did multiple friends in a +/- 1 year window around then. All of us had good experiences and were able to launch our careers as software engineers directly out of App Academy.

That's an inane take. Even in the absolute worst case scenario of 3% global mortality, how would that possibly result in a 50% global decrease in economic output?

There's a multitude of good reasons to close the dorms. People are sharing bedrooms, common areas, bathrooms and kitchens with far more people than they would be in the average private domicile. The network effect of communal living, combined with the generally more lax sanitary/hygenic standards of a younger population, makes any dorm highly at risk for becoming a hotspot, of any infectious disease (and indeed it's quite common for colds, flus and even more serious diseases to cause epidemics in college dormitories).

Here's the thing though, if I'm not already an effective political actor (i.e. someone with a lot of money, or a significant network of people who listen to me, or in a position of control over an institution with proxy access to either of those), the opportunity cost of doing nothing is basically zero.

The assertions that "inaction is a choice" or "political disengagement is a privilege" are coming from a place of naive idealism about the reality of affecting change in modern societies. There's an enormous threshold of activation energy one has to cross to be an efficacious actor against existing large scale power structures, and anything short of it is basically not going to make a difference.

The reality of scale in our world as currently configured is that one private individual could do all the conscientious things - boycott the right things, recycle the right things, vote for the right things - and nothing will change. Even a thousand or a million such individuals randomly distributed doing the exact same things, still wouldn't make a significant difference. Only by acting in coordinated networks would change come about, and it would be driven by the powerful individuals or organizations doing the coordinating, having expended enormous energy to do so. Most people aren't suited to or interested in expending that kind of energy to lead such efforts, and we shouldn't be made to feel guilty for just wanting to go about our lives without trying to "make a difference".

I'm criticizing the assertion on it's logical merits (or lack thereof). You're ignoring the substance of my critique, and making a borderline ad-hominem attack on me, including attempting to guilt me for my presumed identity. So yea, I'm sensing a pattern...

That's a shallow reading of his character. Trump loves few things more than being petty and vindictive towards his perceived enemies, and if big money is involved all the better.

This assertions along the lines of "it's a privilege to be able to be politically disengaged" is just an empty slogan weaponizing empathy to guilt whoever it's directed at towards supporting your political leaning.

It's also a privilege to be able to be politically engaged. Both ways of being are completely protected and legal (in America at least). And both privileges are available to all - even the disadvantaged groups that the slogan implies must be politically engaged for their own survival. It would probably serve their self interest to be more engaged, sure, but in reality they still have the choice. The ethical standard of mandatory political engagement that you're appealing to is not universally recognized or enforced. And if you think of places/times where that ethic of mandatory political life is or was enforced, do you really want to be like that?

Calling it 'conversational prostitution' isn't really an accurate analogy; or rather, it shouldn't be if you're taking the therapy seriously, though a lazy therapist/patient couple could certainly devolve into something more like that. A prostitute provides a luxury service; a therapist is more like a business consultant, as you are both expected to put in work to understand the problems and work together towards solutions. So, sure, you could try to find the solutions yourself, but you don't know what you don't know, or even if you do generally know what your problems are, there's still an opportunity cost in building up the psychological domain expertise to fix them 'in house', when you could expedite the process by bringing in an expert.

deadlift's are quite dangerous for the untrained.

This is just false. Sure, the untrained should get some instruction on proper form, and start with manageable weights, as with any exercise. But deadlifting is the least dangerous of the power lifts, and far less dangerous than half the activities in the average WOD.

Start with "Fix Rounded Shoulders" and "Fix Anterior Pelvic Tilt"

Definitely don't. These are non-scientific maladies invented by fitness personalities to convince you to pay for their specialized expertise to fix your particular biomechanical imperfections. You don't need perfect posture as a prerequisite to benefiting from deadlifting, or any kind of exercise. If you're physically capable of doing the movement, even if your version of the movement is imperfect and not adhering to the mechanical ideal, you're able to benefit from it.

Yea I'm a bit frightened for the creators. I guess if they just comply with the inevitable C&D they won't get sued into oblivion?

Seems very unlikely for safety https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_safety#/media/File:Fa...

Cost, who knows.

I'm no adtech expert, but I'm pretty sure he would not be getting .50 cents per user per year - that's what WebMD, one of the top 1000 most trafficked web sites in the world makes, so I assume it can sell it's ad space at a much higher price than a greenfield site with no traffic would.

Yea, I don't doubt they would remain closely entangled with the US Government even if we changed the IFF incentive structure. But even so, the present incentive structure is particularly perverse because it's creating a positive feedback loop. The GSA has ~$40 billion yearly revenue because of the profit sharing model, which it is incentivized to continually increase, and the consulting firms don't even need to lobby for bigger contracts, the GSA itself lobbies for them.

I'm sure they are, but do the European governments equivalent of the GSA also have incentives to actually drive up the price of consulting contracts they source for their governments? It's not just the coziness that is concerning, but the particularly perverse incentive structure that essentially makes the GSA an inside agent of the consulting industry.

This isn't a matter of unconscious bias. People can (and, arguably, should) have a conscious, intentional bias, against inexperience, when it comes to selecting for skilled work. Age drops off as a useful proxy for experience once someone's been in the workforce for some time, but as others point out, a 23 year old is still going to be definitionally inexperienced in most domains.

Sort of a buried lede here. There's nothing shocking about overpriced, underdelivering consultants. But the bit about how the GSA is essentially profit sharing with said overpriced consultants at the expense of the rest of the government and taxpayers, via the IFF incentive structure, is pretty mind blowing. Another brilliant financial "innovation" by the Clinton Administration that's been quietly burning billions of taxpayer dollars to the end of significantly less efficient government for decades now...

I'd agree with the spirit of your assertion that both the state, through surveillance and beauracratic control, and the market, through ever increasing share of our attention and hold over our appetites, are having harmful effects on many people. But it's interesting that you frame that harm as 'eroding liberty'.

I've recently been reading a book called "Why Liberalism Failed" by Patrick Deneen, which also sees these two forces as working together to harm both the individual and society at large, but not by restricting our liberty so much as trading away other valuable social goods for a surfeit of liberties most of us don't actually need or benefit from. The liberty to buy whatever our appetites desire, at any time. The liberty to uproot ourselves and live "globally" without concern for the locales we leave behind. The liberty to profit seek without regard for externalities.

Deneen draws a contrast between "liberty to <do, own, or be something>" and "liberty from being ruled by our animal urges and appetites". The ancient Greeks who coined the term saw liberty as a virtue explicitly in the latter capacity. But the modern sense of what it is to be liberated is explicitly centered around the former. But I think the liberty you allude to is more of the ancient conception, and I agree, the pincers of the government and the market are eroding our liberty from animal urges, in exchange for an ever expanding menu of nominal liberties to which are often harmful to ourselves and others.

I'm not saying not to tell people about your experience, or encourage inquiry or research, I'm saying don't overstate the weight of your singular experience and encourage others to believe that keto is likely to be a miracle cure for psychosis.

Keto isn’t dangerous for non diabetics.

I don't really want to get into the trenches of arguing about Keto in general, but a cursory googling suggests that this is a controversial assertion.

Again, not trying to silence you, just urging restraint from an epistemological perspective regarding the giving and taking of medical advice by strangers on the internet.

I'm glad that's worked for you. But I don't think you should go around telling people that a keto diet will cure them of their psychosis; there are too many potentially confounding variables to just recommend a keto diet as a general treatment for psychosis, and it's not like it's necessarily a harmless thing to just shrug and try and see if it cures you, as you noted there can be serious side effects of a keto diet. People should make their medical decisions based on consultation with their doctors or other medical professionals, not anecdotes from strangers on the internet.