dbsmith83

> If someone is poor and has a choice between buying a stereo system and saving the money in a high-interest bank account, I doubt you'd have any problem saying that it's in their self interest to do one of those options and not the other

Curious, what would you say is better to do? I could see either one of those choices as being equally rational and justifiable. I honestly lean a little more towards the stereo. Your answer depends on your outlook in life and your interests and wants/needs in the moment. It's not so simple as objective 'data on the situation'. Furthermore, claiming that you can deduce quickly what is rational and right for someone else is a little condescending.

The one I have is from https://getuhoo.com/home and was around $300. For CO2, it looks like resolution is 1 ppm with a tolerance of ±50 ppm or ±3% of reading (higher of the two).

I can't speak to how well it is calibrated since you would need other devices to compare with.

I myself bought an air quality monitor, and am happy I did (uHoo). I have several gas appliances and was concerned about NOx and other possible gases. It turns out everything is about normal, except that CO2 levels in the basement tend to get elevated. I had no idea that this was something that happened. I now make sure to try and air it out down there once in a bit and take breaks more often, since that is where my office is set up.

Kotlin types and Java types are much more compatible than Scala types. No need to use converters. Also, Scala leans very FP, while Kotlin and Java don't, so they are also more similar in that regard, though I don't know if that's what "JVM-aligned" means here. Overall, Kotlin and Java just have better interoperability than Scala and Java

It doesn't actually resolve anything. Just because someone passed a test to see if X was offensive, it doesn't mean they won't find Y offensive. So no, I don't like this 'solution', because it's not a good one. It takes risk where none is needed.

Most advice to give has already been thought about. And if not, you can simply say "Let me get back to you with feedback on ___"

"Act like X" in this situation is not a well known reference point and not a good way to express the idea. Know how we know that? Because the person who said it offended someone and then got reported. Please, quit trying to justify using racially-charged language in this situation

Exactly. There is no need to inject identity politics when you just need to tell someone that they need to make sure to take credit for their work. If you inject identity politics into a situation, you are taking a risk. Going into identity politics when there is no need to just comes across as someone being a vain moralist.

There's many things at play with caffeine. You have increased heart rate and bp, increased concentration/focus, appetite suppression, etc.. I don't think you can point to one effect and say 'this is the one that makes the difference' in a cause and effect kind of way. They are all too related. I personally don't think it matters in this study. You would need another study to pinpoint factors down even more I suppose.

Yeah, working out regularly makes me think twice about ever drinking enough to get even a minor hangover. Plus, a good exercise routine inspires a good diet because after all that time and energy working out, who wants to mess it up?

Ah, this is called an ectopic heart-beat (usually harmless). Back when I drank too much coffee and didn't sleep in my last year of college, I got a few of these. Now I'm a one-cup-a-day kind of guy, and it hasn't happened much anymore.

This from the study was very interesting to me:

> In athletes, it is known that endurance performance is poorer early in the morning and late at night compared with the afternoon [6], and that MFO and Fatmax are higher in the afternoon compared to the morning whether in non-athlete male students [7], in untrained normal-weight and obese individuals [8], or in endurance-trained athletes [9]. The difference has been explained by the higher body temperature, the enhanced neural activation and contractile properties of the skeletal muscle, and the higher plasma catecholamine concentrations found in response to exercise in the afternoon compared to the morning and evening [10, 11].

So it seems like regardless of if you had caffeine or not, it is better to work out in the afternoon vs. in the morning

I've lost significant weight twice (~20-25 lbs). Once was purely diet with very little exercise, and the other way was way more exercise, but less diet control.

The first way made me feel tired and light-headed, and not that great overall. The second way (high exercise, a little diet control) took longer, but also makes me feel 10 years younger and pretty much as healthy as I've ever been.

I do too for the most part. It seems too risky and I am not a professional athlete, so there is no need to push it too hard.

https://aaptiv.com/magazine/pre-workout-drinks "Are Pre-Workout Drinks Healthy or Harmful?" > The caffeine and creatine that most of these drinks contain can also have harmful effects on the body. “Excessive caffeine can increase your heart rate and blood pressure, causing cardiac issues,” Woeckener notes.

The article title is misleading since the participants didn't actually drink coffee. I know, they said they ingested caffeine 'equivalent to', but it's a little misleading. There are other compounds in coffee which could increase or decrease the effects of just caffeine so it's best to not just assume it would be the same.

There is a link to the study at the bottom

> MFO, Fatmax and VO2max were significantly higher in the afternoon than in the morning (all P < 0.05). Compared to the placebo, caffeine increased mean MFO by 10.7% (0.28 ± 0.10 vs. 0.31 ± 0.09 g/min respectively, P < 0.001) in the morning, and by a mean 29.0% (0.31 ± 0.09 vs. 0.40 ± 0.10 g/min, P < 0.001) in the afternoon. Caffeine also increased mean Fatmax by 11.1% (36.9 ± 14.4 [placebo] vs. 41.0 ± 13.1%, P = 0.005) in the morning, and by 13.1% (42.0 ± 11.6 vs. 47.5 ± 10.8%, P = 0.008) in the afternoon.

I just don't see this working out legally. How would it even work?

From the "learn more"

> Sometime soon we will be publishing what we think should happen and what we think will happen. These two futures diverge and we believe that, while the gap between them exists, it will entrench Google’s control over the internet further. We believe that nothing short of socialization of these resources will work to remove Google’s control over the internet. Our hope is that in publishing this work right now we will let the genie out of the bottle and start a process towards socialization that cannot be undone.

Sorry, but I deeply skeptical of this. This sounds like the first step towards a non-free internet. At the end of the day, it is your box on the web, and if you want or don't want someone/something to crawl it, that is your call to make.

Like wears, as in short for 'softwares'

So the point stands then, that the math doesn't add up to pay artists 1 cent a song unless prices go way up

So, if I listen to music for only ~2 hours (120 min) a day, and the average song is 4 minutes, that would be ~30 songs a day, which would be 30 cents a day. $0.30 * 30 days in a month is about $9/month...which is basically my entire subscription fee--probably more. Also, there's like 4 people per account if I remember correctly.

> The article does not address whether it's a bad idea, rather its entire premise is built upon the fact that whether it's a good or bad idea is preceeded by a question of whether it works.

An idea that won't work is a bad idea (to me, at least). From the author's point of view, it won't.

> Several commenters in this thread have pointed out that it does work, and is used to this day, from China's authoritarian implementation to the implementation at other points in history. > I think it's reasonable to make the statement: assuming that it does work (and maybe the article is correct - perhaps it doesn't work), would it still be a good idea? What number of people would it need to work on to be a good idea?

Depends on your definition of works, I suppose. Unfortunately, even if the main objective could be achieved, there are drawbacks. I would not call CCP's implementation a success. Sure, in some ways they have squashed extremist speech, but at what cost? They have also severely curtailed speech which criticizes them. They have created a culture of fear where people self-censor. Eventually, I believe something will have to give. It is simply too early to call it a success or failure at this moment.

> ... but (for instance) it seems similarly doable to ban certain forms of speech that cause unreasonable harm while leaving other forms alone.

Except that the article is dedicated to explaining why it's not doable and is a bad idea in general

Is there a place to find a generic container to house the remote controller and allow button pressing? I'm unsure of where to look, or even what search terms to use.

It's not just the ads. Do you actually trust the company that has personally identifying information about you? Do you trust the people working at said company? Any time you have information about someone, you can use it for nefarious purposes.

> As described above, FLoC cohorts shouldn’t work as identifiers by themselves. However, any company able to identify a user in other ways—say, by offering “log in with Google” services to sites around the Internet—will be able to tie the information it learns from FLoC to the user’s profile.

This reminds me a lot of a lava lamp

Ah, I remember being in middle school and buying a huge book seeming to be 6 inches thick with a copy of Delphi 1.0. This was what started it for me. The really cool thing was that in Delphi, you could often import Visual Basic components. Me and my friend would look for components that other VB programs would use and try to use them in our own projects. GUI creation is second to none with Delphi/Lazarus and I love the event based system, but nowadays I find writing in Pascal a little...not fun.

Because there are benefits to the JVM and interoperability with Java

I'm curious what your use case is for using a suspend function in spark. I have written several spark jobs with Kotlin and have never had a reason to create one. The only difference from the Scala/Java jobs is that I had to be much more explicit with certain things (encoders in higher order funcs, etc.).

How is the tooling more limited? I have never had a problem using any java library/framework with Kotlin.

It's way more than terse classes. The syntax everywhere is cleaner. Higher order functions look so much nicer. Using val/var is superior to having to remember to write 'final' all the time. Kotlin also handles nullability way better. Ah, also, default arguments for constructors/methods. These features prevent a lot of developer mistakes, and thus better code is often achieved.

Also, Kotlin usually forges ahead on features, and the Java is playing catch up. Take data classes for instance. If anything it seems like Kotlin gave Java a good kick in the pants to get it to start developing faster and adding modern language features.