ErikVandeWater

It's not so much far left as it is authoritarian.

Girls are typically more extraverted than boys, which would account for at least some of the difference.

That's extremely glass half-empty of you. There's a surprising number of companies in this list that are about sustainable production. And Zeno Power is developing clean (nuclear) energy.

Early bird/late bird would actually make it a more convenient day care service for parents.

Why haven't schools been opening later in the day already since the science has been clear for years that opening later would improve learning?

Schools could at least give the option of "early-bird" and "late-bird" like I had in elementary school.

> I mean, who seriously thinks the state of calfiornia is literally going to go around and seize everyone's gas generators?

Not really anyone. It's a straw man/motte and bailey.

Maybe they just want you to avoid being a distraction to other soldiers in the heat of battle. Crying out for your mother can't be good for morale.

Was there an HN post about this already?

I'm sure there are correlations between some life risks and being a hippie vs not being a hippie. Stereotypes say hippies are more care-free, so that may make them more prone to risk taking, and more likely to die of (fun example) ziplining accidents.

If something has detrimental effects (dyeing on ziplines) that are outweighed by positive effects (lower blood pressure), it is not fair to say it has no detrimental effects whatsoever.

However I would say the biggest issue with the title is that it doesn't mention the number receiving psilocybin. 60 people is not a lot to say it has no detrimental effects, even if it weren't turning people into hippies.

Downvotes could apply just to future recommendations for search results you see, and not apply to advertisements.

> Enabled downvoting on results, like YT videos. (Has its own spam problems, just like YT)

Are there any search engines that do this? It's a great, simple idea.

It's not about abstaining completely. There's nothing wrong spending some time catching up with what your friends are doing using social media. It's when you spend more time than you'd like to that it becomes a problem.

The problem isn't as much that social media is addictive. The issue is that people aren't happy with their other options of what to do. If you have a draining job and don't have energy to put into a hobby, or you don't have lots of friends to hang out with, you're much more likely to waste time on something addictive.

> The risk adjusted exposure from a reactor should definitely be higher as you would be closer to the threshold of DNA bond breaking.

How are you so certain? You don't know the specifics of the situation. If he worked underwater for a year and spent half a day working on a reactor in protective gear it could easily even out.

I would say the issue isn't so much "interests" as it is what one finds stimulating. Most people are content to discuss the surface-level, but moving up the intellectual curve, the conversation needs to be deeper in order to be satisfying.

Another problem being that most people cannot handle disagreement. If you want to discuss an idea that often leads to disagreement. True intellectuals relish an opposing viewpoint, whereas the vast majority of people wonder why you're being an asshole. The fact that most people cannot handle respectful disagreement in search of a deeper understanding is a problem they have, but a burden placed on others.

And of course most people who would call themselves "intellectual" are actually in the latter category.

Shoutout to Not Just Bikes for thoroughly and enjoyably diving into the problem with cars as primary transit: https://www.youtube.com/c/NotJustBikes

I'd trust that if it gave Business Insider gave a methodology that wasn't absurdly vague. And in the top three hazards listed for flight attendants is "Exposure to minor burns, cuts, bites, or stings." That's not threatening to the health of anyone familiar with bandaids and Neosporin.

> "is avoiding cancellations worth flight attendants risking their health or safety?"

It seems you are disproportionately concerned with Covid as opposed to other occupational hazards. There's a lot of jobs that are dangerous, and being a flight attendant isn't one of them.

> Where vaccine availability is low, its not due to US hoarding but rather due to regional government policy constraints that wouldn't be alleviated if this-US-kid gave up their dose.

Pharmaceutical companies would invest more in finding ways around regional constraints if they didn't have a free profit square by selling their vaccines in the US.

That's a very poor answer since giving any medicine to a child with risks exceeding the benefits so that someone else could benefit would violate the Hippocratic Oath.

Also, there aren't plenty of vaccines leftover worldwide. Vaccines would be going to poorer countries that have low vaccination rates if those vaccines weren't being used for children.

One element I never see discussed is even if the vaccine had no side effects for children, since there is a limited supply of vaccines, inoculating a child in the USA means someone (probably older, less healthy) somewhere else is not getting it. It's totally understandable for US politicians to value the life of a US resident higher than that in another country, but we should discuss how much more valuable that life is.

But it's obviously a lesser degree of pivot than a pivot that discards your current customer base. I also wouldn't be surprised if being a huge buyer of wholesale DVDs got them good contacts in the media/film industry.

Also, the transition from film to digital was more gradual than it appears, as many features now thought of as digital-only were actually available on late generation film cameras.

Sounds a bit like Napoleon.

I think he is concerned with corruption on the grander scale. But he knows the rules of the game and he's going to play optimally at his level.

> "The underlying message of course is that humans ought to take such things as science, research and knowledge seriously, lest we create our own Idiocracy."

The author of this article reached a fairly backwards conclusion. If the smart people hadn't prioritized careers in science and research over creating a family, idiocracy would not have occurred; the smart people would have procreated at the same rate as dumb people.

But I agree that it's more a critique of a "dopamine" driven culture that has no critical thinking skills.

> Susan Rosenberg's position as vice chair of the board of directors for Thousand Currents is intended to imply that BLM itself is a terrorist organization.

Or, much more reasonably, that it is an organization unconcerned with violence affecting innocent people.

Agreed! The chain:

"Fact" checks > Polarization > Poor discussion > People retract to their own bubbles where discussion isn't hostile > Insular communities with groupthink 1> Sharing of content that is agreeable to the group, but factually incorrect 2> Not checking factual accuracy of content because it would be offensive to one's loyalty to the group

> I would argue that if a post is verifiably, unequivocally false it is right to flag it as such.

The incentive to move the bar lower will lead to constant lowering of the bar until we're back to where we are today.

Trust in scientists is too high when they keep pumping out studies that don't replicate, and don't publish the original data and methods used to reach conclusions.

I wholly trust science that independently replicates and the fact that it's missing from the process means much of what we see is less than wholly trustworthy.

Capital Hill riot vs insurrection

BLM "mostly peaceful" protest vs riot