thegrim22

I assume you have data that backs up your claim that a non-trivial percentage of homeless got hooked, legally, on opiates before turning to fentanyl? Please link it.

Alternatively, Reddit is so useful as a place to push propaganda that it'll never be allowed to fail and will always propped up in one way or the other so maybe it's a safer bet than you'd expect.

I research companies I'd want to work for, look at their site's job page for open positions that match what I want to do, and if there are any, I apply for them through whatever mechanism the company provides.

It's a selective tax break that specifically targets only a certain subset of the population, and not the rest, that would be enacted in an election year, a handful of months before the election occurs.

From the study the article is about: "participants who had recovered from Covid-19 in whom symptoms had resolved in less than 4 weeks or at least 12 weeks had similar small deficits in global cognition as compared with those in the no–Covid-19 group".

So no, it doesn't apply to everyone that has ever caught covid. It's only (allegedly) people who had multiple months of "symptoms" post-covid that had a change in cognitive ability.

So the article and study argue that millennials aren't actually lazy, because it's young people in general that are lazy (about work). Literally. It's a dystopian argument. They're saying that it's nothing specifically to do with a certain generation of people, it's just that young people on average are more lazy now. So millennials aren't lazy, definitely, only young people are, which millennials are, but millennials aren't lazy. It does your head in trying to follow their "logic".

Less demand with same supply = lower prices. The owners either work with the lower prices or if they're so low that it makes sense to replace the office with something else that'd have better returns then that will happen. Pretty simple really.

There's also a political angle since NASA represents the US. If anything goes wrong with a NASA project it's a massive propaganda opportunity for agitators and rival countries to mass spam the internet about how horrible America has become, what a laughing stock, etc., etc., doing everything they can to push their anti-US propaganda as hard as they can. There's more repercussions for NASA to fail at something than a private company.

There's obviously two sides to the issue, right? Or else there wouldn't be any debate. Or else no companies would do RTO. Why is it that in multiple years of reading HN I've never once seen an article that covers the other side's position? Why is it that the reporting is 100%, completely, always biased in one direction? It's like this across whole swaths of topics, not just about RTO.

Wouldn't we prefer forums of communication that were unbiased and which fairly discussed the props/cons of each point of view? Or do we really just prefer the echo chamber / propaganda / dogpile approach?

Where any political content that aligns with the platform's ideology is considered "the truth", not politics, and will be allowed to be spread, whereas any political content that does not align will be deplatformed.

Am I missing something or are there no pictures of the 4000W version, only the 2000W version? The 2000W version's panels encompass the entire footprint of the vehicle so I'm trying to imagine how on Earth you could possibly double the wattage still.

I know it was only one piece of the article that talks about RTO, but as an aside, I don't think I've ever once in my life, in person or online, seen someone arguing for remote work that provided even a single piece of data, a single number, to back up their assertions. Their arguments instead just presuppose that RTO is awful and remote work is amazing, as if everyone "just knows" it. And apparently everybody that's involved with RTO is supposedly just a complete idiot that doesn't know anything about their business, or, as hinted at in the article, they're involved in some sort of grand conspiracy to force an "ineffective" RTO on workers for conspiratorial reasons.

The vast majority of (radio) SETI relies on primarily searching for intentional, powerful, repeating, beacons/signals. We have scores of unexplained, suspicious looking signals that we just discard because the signals never repeated and so we'll never know what they were and can't ever make any conclusion about them. The only really unambiguous signal we can detect is a powerful repeating beacon, and so that's all we really look for. Also, any "random" non-beacon leakage another civilization might internally produce is expected to be too low-powered for us to pick up hundreds or thousands of light-years away. Nobody in their right mind would design their internal communications to be so insanely inefficient that they'd be blasting it strongly, unambiguously, potentially omnidirectionally, for us hundreds/thousands of light years away to detect. What an insane waste of energy that would be.

If they want fewer people they obviously aren't doing a good job considering the population increases every single year.

Maybe the morals our societies have held for hundreds/thousands of years around moral decency and civility had a point. But I guess I'm glad you're wiser than all the generations that came before you, and you know better than all of them.

This comment thread will effectively be a modern two minutes of hate.

"that he stops promoting hatred and division"

Your entire post is literally a rant with the sole purpose of promoting hatred and division.

Remember when 20 years ago if anybody had doubts with the way things were heading we were told "there's no war on cars you conspiracy theorist, nobody's going to come for your cars you conspiracy theorist"? After 20 years they've made enough progress shaping the narrative that they no longer need to lie and hide their agenda they can just put it in the open.

Just your typical political/social warfare manipulation piece. Everyone involved in it is horrendously politically biased, and you have to follow their links 10 layers deep trying to find the source of anything they've claimed, and at the very bottom of the links nothing they link to even exists anymore.

I'm trying to figure out what this article is saying, how people could be losing their homes but it not being "their fault". The best I can understand is that these people had their loan payments deferred for COVID, and now their payments are resuming, but interest rates have risen in the meantime, and so now when their payments are resuming they have to pay more because of higher interest rates, and they can't afford to pay it. So ... they took out a loan with a variable interest rate, they can't pay the loan now that interest rates have changed, and so it's "not their fault" because these programs refused to keep allowing them to defer payments?

I really dislike it and every time my license expires I somehow end up getting screwed over. I'll be using version X, then pay for a year license, use version X for the entire year, never upgrade, and then after a year when the license expires all of the sudden I'm locked out of version X and told my "fallback" version is some version older than X. Why isn't my fallback version the latest stable version at the time I purchased the product?

Weird headline .. from the article it's pretty clear that it wasn't a "5 day trip", but that he had undiagnosed mental health issues, and that tripping on mushrooms kicked them off in a horrible way. The half life of Psilocybin is only ~2 hours, it's scientifically impossible to still have it active in your system 5 days later.

Also back then every other post wasn't full of political echo chamber warfare like your jab about russian propaganda you just couldn't resist throwing in.

Why it's news (biases, politics, etc.) is more interesting than the news itself.

So, to summarize, in a thread about polarization ... you're listing out the political issues that affect you that you think the other side of the aisle doesn't care about, while using emotional/alarmist phrasing, accusing the other side of lying, and complaining that the media isn't biased enough towards your brand of politics.

How can you not see that you yourself are a huge part of the problem?

So, let me get this straight -

There's what seems to be a politically questionable think group, whos entire shtick is researching into inequality. They release a paper in which they studied the poorest members of their country, and found that differences in intergenerational mobility, across various factors in the poorest members, hasn't changed much in people born in the 80s compared to people born in the 70s, both of which had slightly worse mobility (they don't provide any numbers for this) compared to people born in the 50s.

Then some highly emotional, obviously politically biased "journalist" takes this, and turns it into an opinion piece story about how "hard work doesn't make you rich".

What? There's nothing about this journalism which is any way real. From one end to the other it's purely emotional, political propaganda.

At least correct for inflation .. they could be making the same exact profit margins every year but as long as there's inflation, the number will be bigger every single year. Just saying "but number bigger!" doesn't mean squat.

Not a single comment about whether the claim is actually true or not? Just assuming the absolute worst / most damaging scenario? The propaganda machine is pumping hard isn't it.

The guy you're replying to took the data as he saw it, formed a hypothesis that matched the data, and the hypothesis makes a prediction which can be validated. Is it an unlikely/weak hypothesis? Sure. But you're asking him to just throw away thought/science, to not try to explain the world.

The fact that they decided not to mention who the largest emitters are should clue you into who it is.