fibbery

Not cheap

The author's point was specific to studies in psychology.

Also education and childcare

Where does it show links to the fast food industry in that brochure?

What about cigarettes?

/s? These are both mentioned in the article...

"The Majority of Children Live With Two Parents, Census Bureau Reports"

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-192...

I like dividend stocks because it is automatically increasing my number of shares in a stock I like, and thereby 'bakes in' the gains. A stock that doesn't have dividends must be sold in order to reap profits, and as a novice investor I never know when to sell.

I don't believe a Thinkpad ever killed anyone, though.

Found a typo / grammatical mistake: Icons is an essiental part of modern web design. -> "Icons are an essential..."

huh? the author of the article isn't a developer.

My guesses: Chicago, Boston, SF, ??

I read 100 books last year as well. Commuting by bus an hour each way is a lot of time to fill. I highly recommend the Libby app if your local library supports it. Free books on your phone or Kindle!

So you invested in the run up to the crash as well? Or only started investing in 2009+ (also known as a sweet summer child :)

> most women actually want the experience of being pregnant.

I'm really curious if this is true.

when chrome can't connect to a site or it crashes, the page that shows up has a dinosaur on it.

Auto-tune is probably more of an explanation than hormones. I've been to more than one of concerts in recent years where the lead singer couldn't actually hit the high notes live.

"In the past, ancient humans had no diabetes or cancer"

Do you have a source for this?

Maybe it's the intensive labor that made them valuable in the first place, as signifiers of wealth. Now that intricate details can be mass produced inexpensively, minimalism is in vogue.

they kind of suggest to do that though, at the end of point 7

Some companies also require repayment of signing bonuses/relocation if the employee leaves within a year. So that gives people incentive to try and make the best of things even if they would have otherwise left.

is innate skill filed under luck?

Personally, I don't eat anything above a certain (arbitrarily defined) intelligence threshold. So octopus and pig are out. Chicken, however...

spinach, peanut butter, celery

spinach + peanut butter = pra ram (this assuming the ingredients can be cooked)

raw spinach + celery = a salad

raw celery + peanut butter = a common child's snack

spinach + celery + peanut butter together, whether cooked or raw....:/

Wow no, it's not just the colors. Putting their front page and yours side by side the similarities are unmistakeable (nav position and style, button styles, use of centered line drawing on landing page, some of the copy). Whether it was intentional or not, I would change some things up to avoid confusing people and any legal implications that might have.

No, I don't have experience with the UK justice system, so perhaps my comment isn't as relevant for this specific article.

That said, even if this specific scenario isn't realistic, discussions about the problems with surveillance state don't have to be grounded in "what happens right now" because the information stored today is available to future regimes and the specific technology involved is continuously changing.

> But what about the people who don't support racism/xenophobia, read a mix of news sources, aren't male (and so don't match with crime profiling). Are you saying their argument for not needing strong encryption is valid?"

Not at all, and I'm surprised that's what you would conclude from my statement. Obviously not every crime ever has that specific profile. The point was that when you have tons and tons of information about everyone, that is all categorized and geotagged and searchable and machine-learnable, it's a LOT easier for a completely innocent person to become a suspect.

the only way I have had any success is to describe the problem in terms of "wrong place wrong time" + "misinterpreted evidence" scenarios. this is something I wrote up a while back to try to explain it to a family member:

---------------------------------------------------------------

Imagine a crime takes place in a certain area. Using surveillance technology, police identify everyone who was in the area around the time of the crime. They do this through license plate recognition, face recognition, cell phone tracking, and credit card receipts. You happen to be on that list because you were shopping at a nearby store earlier.

You're now technically a suspect in a crime, although there's a thousand other suspects, and you have nothing to hide, so no big deal, right?

A witness saw the perpetrator running away from the crime. They only saw them from the back, but report that the suspect is a tall white male around 40 years of age.

So police narrow down that list to just people who fit this description. Uh oh, the list is now only about 50 people, and you're one of them.

The crime appears to be a potential race-motivated hate crime. Using web profiling, investigators search for those 50 people to look for any history of involvement with hate groups. The algorithm they use has over-zealously classified certain extreme right wing news sources as potential markers for hate crime.

You're not particularly worried, I mean, you're obviously not some crazy racist. There's no way they'd be interested in you.

But you forgot - six months ago, you started to get interested in the immigration debate, and posted on several anti-immigration forums.

With the additional profiling, the list narrows down to 8 suspects, including you. You happen to fit other markers for this kind of crime as well - you live alone, work a less prestigious job, neighbors say you don't go out much.

Now you're a suspect in a crime. You'll almost certainly not be convicted, because there's no direct evidence. But good luck explaining that to your employer, your family, your friends, and the criminal defense lawyer you now have to pay for.

Still think you have nothing to hide?

Do you have a toddler? I'm not a parent but my understanding is that you can't expect them to just play quietly by themselves for any more than short stretches.

I agree that it is a stand in for a name. Some ideas on why that might be:

-- sometimes babies don't immediately have names, and we need a way to refer to them

-- professionals who work around babies and in birthing tend to address both the baby and the adults by their family relationships (it's Mom, Dad, Grandad, etc. instead of George and Laura). This is presumably because that helps it keep clear what everyone's the relationships is to the baby, and what role they should play in the whole process.

-- babies aren't really people with their own unique identities when they are first born, so maybe it is kind of awkward to address them with their full adult name.

Agreed. Just some random thoughts

- I'd add some indication of how long the tour is. Felt like I clicked for a while. Maybe I'm just impatient.

- Highlight the input that the tour popup is currently referencing in some way (eg add blue focus border)

- All of your inputs have explanatory text below them, and no labels. They also have no spacing to show what goes with what. You should add labels above the inputs, and put the explanatory text in a tooltip

- You have a breadcrumb kind of display on the top right side. Usually that's on the top left. I also expected it to be interactive since it is styled in blue, like a link

- Can you put the search results in an iframe or something, keeping the user on the same page? Opening a new tab was unexpected.