hammock

Try this https://www.edweek.org/leadership/how-a-virginia-district-fa...

You yourself recommend band work which is putting your shoulder under load

The real answer is the shoulder is complicated mechanically and you need to work on reinforcing or building the smaller groups (Is, Ys and Ts type of exercises and many others), if you can actively stabilize your shoulder this way you will reduce pain, inflammation and decrease the propensity for injury, allowing you to do traditional shoulder exercises like press etc without issue. I suggest working with a good PT

Manufacturing lines have tight tolerances. Science has 95% confidence intervals (or greater). HFT has fractional pennies to steamroll up. But “business” (broadly), leadership, macro decisions 3+ steps removed from the coal face can safely operate at wider tolerances.

I cringe whenever I see “xx.xx% growth” on a report as if the value in that hundredth of a percent place is going to sway anyone’s opinion one way or the other. It’s superfluous, wasteful and I would argue, harmful.

The U.S. Marines teach the “70% solution” which says that making a decision that is 70% correct now is better than making a 100% correct decision later.

The speed of your OODA loops is critically important, and cannot be overlooked or expensed in favor of determinism, predictability etc for its own sake. (After all “no plan survives first contact”)

This statement is tautology.

There is only one country in the Middle East with an aggressive expansionist mentality, and it’s not Iran.

And what’s with the superpower commentary, you neglected to connect it to Iran and are you saying Russia is bigger than China?

For what?

“If you can’t measure it, we still know it’s important, we’re not idiots, McNamara was imprecisely defined in its common form”

Yet at the same time,

“If you can measure it, you can convince enough people it’s the only thing that’s important and then overfit to it”

We’re about to see many more of the same thing except the “data” has been replaced with “ai output”

I find it hard to be persuaded by the salary idea. A hitman who works for $100 is just as bad as one who works for $10,000.

In fact other immoral activities work the opposite, bizarrely (a whore who works for $100 is worse than one who works for $10,000)

Language like this is intended to invest power and perceived need for more power in Western central governments, by design, because this is a campaign for national regulation that will entrench the current closed-source labs with a huge regulatory moat vs anyone else.

You are taking this too literally anyway. I know they don’t backstop jack squat but in practice there is a fed put.

Have a conversation with me, don’t be a pedant.

If you are saying they will lend last resort against treasuries you should know there are $40 trillion of those outstanding…

How about what’s the amount from banks that the fed would willing lend as a last resort?

This is so funny to me, because as many people know, sharing an analogy with another person is the fastest way to LOSE an argument with someone, or otherwise spiral it into an unproductive place.

I think it’s Scott Adams who used to say analogies work well for explaining. They work terribly for persuasion.

> Our Samsung fridge’s manual says it’ll automatically and silently mesh network with any Samsung TVs in range, use AI and hidden cameras to recognize what’s in the fridge and when we use it, then have the TV inject targeted ads into programming based on its findings. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45742208

In saying “accurate information” there is a hidden presumption that not all government information needs to be shared. Forget about whether it’s accurate or not and who decides what’s accurate, just be maximally open

The framers discussed this in a few key ways, which resonate ALL TOO WELL with today:

Anti federalist Brutus 1 suggested that in a large republic, representatives will be too far removed from their constituents. Because citizens cannot personally observe public officials, the people "cannot be acquainted with their characters, know their motives, nor be informed of their proceedings." A lack of information would prevent citizens from holding officials accountable.

Anti federalist Centinel 1 directly warns against the manipulation of information by the wealthy elite, arguing that the public can easily be deceived by "well-born" politicians who mask their pursuit of tyranny behind noble rhetoric.

In Federalist 10 and 51 Madison argued alternatively (looks naive today) that a large, diverse republic makes it harder for corrupt politicians or factions to spread misinformation effectively across the entire nation.

In Federalist 70 Hamilton explicitly defended a single, powerful President because it provides accountability. With a single executive, the public knows exactly who to blame for bad policy or false statements, preventing officials from shifting blame or hiding behind an anonymous committee

But the Sedition Act passed only 10 years after the constitution made it illegal to publish "false, scandalous, and malicious writing" against the government, a restriction it could be argued that the government doesn’t even have in itself

Modern law of relevance include the Smith Mundt Act 1948 which prohibited the government from propagandizing its own people (limited to foreigners). The smith mundt “modernization” amendment crammed into NDAA 2012 did away with this restriction and now we have an explosion of govt-payroll influencers , news anchors, talking points memos etc that aren’t exactly…accurate

At the time being, the vast vast majority of those agents are all trained on the same or similar training set (the Internet and books). Which makes them mostly all the same. Vastly less diverse than the way one complex lifeform hatches out of the egg vs another.

So 1 billion mostly redundant agents at most. Well there are 40 quadrillion ants on the planet and 5 trillion are born every day. Each one its own “agent” , ingesting different inputs and being its own complex sum greater than its parts.

And that’s just ants.

“( Name and address, or license registration and insurance if in a vehicle)” -required by law pretty much everywhere.

“I’m exercising my right to silence. I will not answer questions without a lawyer”

“I do not consent to any searches”

“Am I being detained, or am I free to go”- say this one anytime you think the officer might be done with the reason he stopped you, because it “starts a clock” of unlawful extension

Pick whichever one makes the most sense at any given moment. Don’t say anything else. If the officer says you are free to go, leave.

As for what you can refuse, you really can’t during the stop. You have to fight in court. LISTEN CAREFULLY to the words of the officer and do not respond to QUESTIONS, only ORDERS. They are trained to ask you to do things that might be unlawful if they were orders, like can you step out of the car for me please, can you follow my flashlight for me, can you roll down your window all the way. If you are unclear, ask “are you ordering me, officer?”

If any part of the stop was unlawful your defense attorney can iron that out later in court (and if so, typically everything occurring after the unlawful gets thrown out)

If you want to go a step further and be polite etc, know that many police won’t give you brownie points for it, but if they ask you questions like “where are you coming from” or “where are you going” or “who are/were you with” redirect your answers only to plainly obvious facts about YOURSELF ONLY and the PRESENT time, e.g. “I am out for a drive officer”

Caveat: IANAL, this is not legal advice

Source: SWIM has extensive experience in this area