6,201 karma · joined April 19, 2015
These numbers are rough but there you go. Your intuition is correct. Roughly 100X.
The misery of quitting comes from wanting something you cannot have. The trick to avoiding that misery is to truly not want it. Then the only remaining struggle is a few days of noticeable physical symptoms (like having a mild flu, at worst) and the long struggle of trying to not forget why you don't want to smoke or vape or snus.
Anyone wishing to quit should read Alan Carr's book. Don't worry about whether everything in the book is literally true; the point of the book is not to be a list of pedantically true statements; the point of the book is to get you to quit smoking.
I don't expect any prosecution here, but is the above legally accurate?
Unlike when you use an app, for the most part, because we're not psychopaths, living with someone every day for months or years causes us to feel a great affinity and care towards them.
I live in a developing country. Some people treat their live-in staff badly. But for many others, this is not the case.
Imagine you are a high-earner and hard worker and so you and your wife get a live-in nanny to assist with childrearing duties. Often, two or three decades later, the live-in nanny is ready to retire, but your children (whom you love) have come to see her as a member of the family, or even as a second mother. Surely you also do. How can you live with someone for 20-30 years and not care about them? You might thus often take care of her for the rest of her life, even though she has her own savings.
(No, I do not have live-in house staff. But I've had the same maid for 7 years and she knows she can come to me if she needs anything.)
How one treats someone else is probably mostly just a reflection of the individual. But it's harder to disregard someone's humanity when they live in your house and you've know them for years.
Perhaps him being in custody will lead to some of the money being found and returned.
Swipe or use the arrow keys to make pairs orthogonally adjacent in as few moves as necessary. If you make an unnecessary move, your score resets to zero.
It's not perfect and unfortunately isn't perfectly responsive on old phones. Have fun!
Most of the corpuses I've found heavily over-represent newspaper articles and books, obviously. So the frequency ranking is biased towards academic/crime/geopolitics, not spoken english. But even then, it depends what you most commonly speak about!
There's no better way to do it, though. I'm just providing context.
In other words, prediction markets require suckers to lose money to insiders in order for the public to learn new information. In this case, people lost over a million dollars to an insider so the public could learn that "d4vd" was searched a lot.
Is this good?