buildingsramen

now _that_ would be more interesting, but it would also be a completely different article

Sure, sure; an unexamined life is not worth living, yadda yadda

I just take issue with this type of analysis for trying to generate that depth - as an etymological lesson, it's minimally interesting, but as far as it tries to "say something" about Japanese culture, it can't.

I feel like this is intellectualizing something that isn't that deep. It's a word you say, not think about. Why do English speakers say "excuse me" after a sneeze? The answer is apocryphal and uninteresting.

Hollywood has always been a little bit dumb, a little bit over-written. It's hard to have both artistic individualism and a reliable business. This is not a new trend.

The examples are not very good. I would take Gladiator II, but Megalopolis was a self-funded project which is completely out of left field, and The Apprentice... I'm not sure what it's an example of. Many more titles are dismissed with a couple words. They really lose me when it comes to Anora. That's quite possibly the worst take I've heard about that film yet, and I've read some Letterboxd reviews.

> What feels new is the expectation, on the part of both makers and audiences, that there is such a thing as knowing definitively what a work of art means or stands for, aesthetically and politically.

Before rushing to judge today's movies, shall we remind ourselves what popular movies 20 years ago were? There were some real stinkers there, too, and they were not more smartly written in this regard. They just weren't.

> The point is not to be lifelike or fact-based but familiar and formulaic—in a word, predictable.

Has this person forgotten Titanic, one of the best-selling movies of all time? It's extremely formulaic, predictable, and intentionally so. It's basically opera, not really a new genre.

This is poorly reported. From the article:

* Group A reported a 26% increase in participants staying in housing they rented or owned;

* Group B reported a 35% increase in housing they rented or owned;

* And Group C, which received the smaller sum of money, reported a 20% increase in renting or owning housing.

But these are not actually percentages - these are percentage points!

* Group A went from 8% to 34% - a 4.25x increase

* Group B went from 5% to 40% - an 8x increase

* Group C went from 11% to 30% - a 2.7x increase

Which is a lot more dramatic than saying 20% vs 26% vs 35%.

The study authors might have good reason for reporting it this way, such as many participants dropped out of the study before follow-up, which probably skews toward people with more chaotic lifestyles. So the denominator for each group has changed at follow-up and could at least partially explain why all groups saw improvements.

Right here, a free, public, and professionally-designed report: https://wikimediafoundation.org/about/annualreport/2022-annu...

Regular announcements of specific grants: https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2023/04/13/first-grants...

Have you tried taking a warmed-up water bottle, chilling it, and pouring it into a glass? I wonder if part of it is the psychological effect.

I'm not disagreeing per se, but you may be interested to listen to this interview with the Competition Commissioner for more perspective. My takeaway is that it's the laws, not the enforcers, that need to change:

https://www.canadaland.com/podcast/monopoly-7-canadas-compet...

I'm happy you have a functioning government in Germany!

I mean, you could have spent 5 minutes Googling the answers to your questions.

Here is some reading on this topic:

https://www.thestar.com/business/2022/07/09/supermarkets-are...

https://www.thestar.com/business/2022/10/24/canadas-competit...

Suggesting that people who can't afford to eat should liaise with their elected official, who should present it to the legislature, empower the Competition Bureau to properly investigate the issue, then wait for the Competition Bureau to audit these companies and win a case through the judicial system (and that's the ideal case) – well, I think that's going to happen too slow to prevent starvation.

I'm personally worried about this because rising food prices predict riots and rebellions through history. Either prices have to come down, wages have to go up, or we're gonna see a greater loss of social cohesion and we'll have a much bigger problem on our hands. Getting the government to act on this on a macro scale is going to be a huge task given who's in power right now.

What do you mean? There are tons of these around. Are you complaining that none of them are popular enough?

I would recommend examine.com as a research tool. One of the few sites not trying to sell you supplements.

I think that sounds conspiratorial. If there is someone in elected office who has this sort of control, why not do it year-round?

Since this is a worldwide trend, how are they able to control it outside their borders?

I don't think it's based on safety, either. It's almost certainly a safety perception / marketing thing.

However, the type of bike they are using is much safer than a normal bicycle because of its size.

The physics don't work that way. With a normal bicycle, you go over the handlebars because the whole bike tips forward - it's just gravity + momentum. Then you faceplant.

With a wheelbase of 2-3m, there's just no way the bike tips forward like this, especially with the rider positioned towards the back. Couple that with the fact that cargo bikes travel at lower average speeds and it's not clear to me how this injury occurs.

Did you read the article? These bikes are 2-3 meters long. There is no chance of this type of injury occurring with them.

I have the same issue with Elite 75t. It seems to be the result of the microphone volume adaptively creeping downwards. When it gets too low, Jabra auto-mutes.

You can bump the volume up to the midpoint in your audio settings and it will take about another month to re-occur. Sorry this isn't a better solution.

That's not the quote.

Back to your original comment,

>Thank god one's civil liberties aren't dependent on whether or not you are convinced by them.

Apparently they are dependent on whether SCOTUS is convinced.

A DUI checkpoint is fundamentally different because police are unable to discriminate who they stop. They stop everyone who passes through the checkpoint.

See the Supreme Court ruling on this matter, elsewhere in this thread.

Can you tell me which of your civil liberties is being violated by DUI checkpoints?

I find these arguments much more convincing than "muh freedom". If these points are supported by evidence (especially #4) then that's good enough for me.

I reject your reasoning of pushing things into absolutes - drunk driving needs to be minimized, and people need to get where they are going. There's a balance between those needs that is optimal. Nobody is preventing you from reaching your destination, "how fast" is the only question.

I'm shocked at the comments in this thread decrying DUI checkpoints. Does anyone not see drunk driving as a serious threat to public safety?

Just a couple thoughts on this.

No, it's not impossible.

The position of the American Anthropological Association is that there is far, far greater variation within races (however that concept is defined) than between races. I think this is a sensible position to take, and one supported by evidence, even though it does not directly answer your question.

For me, the real question is: Do we really want to pursue this research goal? As psychology is very far from a complete science there's a lot of room for ambiguity and interpretation in the cutting edge of the evidence. Given human history, and up to and including the present state of our politics, I really do not trust our society to see the nuance and contingency in emerging data. The risk of studying such a topic would be gargantuan, and for what practical benefits? There are certainly many other worthy topics which deserve our scientific attention without carrying all the risk of this one.

On top of that: defining and measuring a concept as nebulous as "intelligence" is a nightmare. To reduce it to a 1-dimensional scale I think is your first sign that things are not quite right.