moosey

Appeal to hypocrisy and name calling.

Every statement you made was either logically fallacious or just verbal abuse.

Anxiety will do it too. So will hypervigilance, which presents with ADHD like symptoms but arises from trauma.

I am one of them. I have three in the house, mostly for future parts.

I have been gaming for 35 years, and in the 15 of those where I have played first person shooters, no controller compares. Even when I'm playing other kinds of games, the ability to do everything without having to remove your finger from the pads to hit buttons, the size is perfect, everything is so responsive.

They "feel" cheap, but I don't care. They are gaming nirvana for me.

This is category error, at a minimum. 'highly progressive people' is an abstraction and cannot take action. It's imagine it's also inductive reasoning and out group bias.

There is widespread statistical evidence that wealth is gained through luck. I imagine though that every billionaire thinks they are the one that got there through hard work.

At a minimum, this is a false dichotomy. Stopping for a moment to think creatively, there are many alternatives. Many of those alternatives would probably serve human welfare better than what we have today.

Living in the country that produces and exports the most weapons, and that also extracts the most hydrocarbons, I came to believe that I lived a superior life via effective propaganda. Now I come to see that these actions are not only against my values, but that they also cause great harm.

There must be superior alternatives.

> I imagine that travel to Mars, and a moon colony seemed like it was just around the corner in 1970 and yet here we are 50 years later and neither one of those came to fruition.

It was just around the corner. The grand arc of human life altered course, and it took the market 50 years to catch up to collective action.

The most likely candidate for this virus, and most future viruses that produce pandemics, will be environmental destruction and animal agriculture.

We know there are novel viruses out there, too many to count. Even if this started in a lab the most likely reason is that scientists need to study the viruses that we will be coming into contact with as we commit, as a species, to more environmental destruction. I'm really exhausted of watching scientists get blamed repeatedly for the failures of our economic and social systems to act responsibly.

Sure, the lab hypothesis might have some weight, some possibility of being true. It's still a red herring, either a distraction from the real issues we face by accident or design, or both.

Making more money isn't the only potential life improvement that is possible. Yes, there are things that a person working at Starbucks can learn that will still improve their lives, and make it more fulfilling: languages, philosophy and knowledge are often their own reward.

Further, it seems obvious to me that hunting money is a fools game. If money made people happy, at some point, then why do billionaires push for tax cuts, and more power and wealth? As research is starting to show, wealth is an emotional hunger that you can never sate.

There are carbon neutral meats, I recognize that. While still an ethical calamity, at least if we could get everyone to cut over.

If, and I mean if, such a health outcome differential between being a vegan and not, then it would be widely known. As far as I am able to garner from known population studies my children will be a few inches shorter due to a vegan diet, no less intelligent, and will have a very compassionate ethical starting point, which is something I personally value.

However, if veganism required is to scale back massively scientific research due to drops in human intelligence, I would be on the fence... Further, I do recognize that giving up meat to be an actual sacrifice of summer form... There seems to be a large biological desire to eat meat, which probably is actually largely derived from gut bacteria, if I were to guess. Still, perhaps giving up meat is an actual sacrifice. With my indifference to meat after 16 years or so, I am heavily biased towards veganism as a tool for meeting the climate needs of our current planet biosphere.

Nah, man, I really don't like meat and I can't think of a defendable defense for it's continued consumption given what we know today.

I'm a vegan and I could give a crap how we ate 100k years ago. It has no bearing on building a contemporary diet conducive to health optimal health and pollution related outcomes.

Given trophic levels, meat takes far more energy, land, and clean water to produce. Population studies repeatedly show that large amount of meat consumption leads to individual and population health issues. The same is true of sugar and alcohol, I readily admit, and assume kinds of meat don't require as much energy.

We are fishing our oceans to extinction, destroying essential natural area to grow soy and corn which we then waste 90% of as cow feed.

There is no amount of persuasion that could make me go back, unless the laws of physics are rewritten such that eating meat reduces the amount of atmospheric carbon.

Right. If everyone wants a scapegoat there is a real one that we can all focus on: meat consumption. 1918 flu pandemic probably started on a pig farm. This one at a wet market. We encroach on nature to make more corn and soy for meat, the outcome will be more diseases and death, and that doesn't even include the health issues and dangerous conditions required for cheap meat.

This isn't a theory, unfortunately, but since it requires self reflection it will never be a popular story in the US media. I admit I have seen it discussed in print several times.

For some people, I imagine, enough to live on IS fu money. Not everyone needs the profligacy of a car, house, travel, etc., a large amount of personal space.

Enough for mental health without the great of losing everything and being homeless.

Applying this logic, perhaps we can get "professional" stock ... manipulators off the TV. CNBC can go away entirely. Marketing speak would be replaced with value charts. Ban all forums that discuss specific stock values.

Then prevent people from buying stocks in groups. Mutual funds, ETFs, etc... all of these abstractions on abstractions, we can throw them away. The more abstractions we throw away, the closer we get to what all this should actually be meant to serve; people.

A person can believe anything they want.

If there were evidence of a stolen election, then Trump would have won a number of court cases from one of the MANY judges, mostly ... well, conservative, to use a label ... that he placed his cases in front of.

Anyone can look at these cases and have an understanding of the actual evidence presented, and see, objectively, that there was not significant election or voter tampering, and definitely not significant enough to change the election.

I'm far more concerned about attempts to make it harder to vote before the election - the one drop box per county in TX, for example, then I am that any election was stolen.

Haven't you noticed? We can't!

The problem with the colloquial 'conspiracy' (as opposed to the standard legal definition of people working together towards a generally nefarious goal), is that they are impossible to disprove, for the most part. Evidence to the contrary is disregarded, and the lack of supporting evidence is used as additional evidence ('the real evidence is being hidden by those in power').

What I see in these documents, and based on responses, is that the case is strong. I do see that it is from states that disagree with me philosophically and politically. This information is irrelevant and is categorization error and outgroup bias; the same things that I would request my current political opposition to give up, without success.

If we all suffer from these cognitive illusions and refuse to abandon them, then we cannot grow as a society or a people; we can never have a shared understanding because the experiences I am basing decisions on are not a real.

Discussing a "Vast right-wing conspiracy against Google" might be falsifiable with perfect information, but what percentage of 'right wing' conspirators must there be before it is determined true? How many 'right-wing' members - of which there are at least 74M - would I have to poll to find out if the conspiracy is vast?

I don't deny that we are in an [mis]information war, but the boundaries of that are much better known and are often discussed by security experts.

It's fine to be skeptical, but there are so many layers of expertise here: statisticians, epidemiologists, medical personnel. This multilayered denial of expertise is, well, troubling.

Before anyone writes an article like this, claiming to understand the body politic, consider that an enormous number of people right now refuse to wear masks during a pandemic. They don't just oppose wearing masks, they violently and angrily oppose it. They make a big point out of not wearing masks. Anyone who writes an article like this suggesting that I need to compromise with political opposition needs to start here, and explain to me what I need to change about my own behavior in order to meet sociopathy 'in the middle'. Sure, mask wearing isn't a perfect left/right venn diagram, but societal issues and political issues are very much tied together (see religion, abortion, LGBT rights, etc.).

I will argue the reason this happens is not because of bad marketing by "Democrats", "liberals", or scientists, but because misinformation is highly effective, and backed by what could be one of the most advanced algorithms in the world: The facebook addiction algo. It is as much a human programming tool as anything that has ever existed, and I wonder if society can maintain stability while it prints money.

> But "just having food and shelter" is by no means the thing to be overcome. Or do you think that food and shelter just appears like magic in front of everyone?

Yeah, essentially. We need so few people dedicated to this line of work because of the wonderful scientific, technological and logistic discoveries of the past century. The fact that we have people that starve today is a failure of culture and politics and nothing more. With such a rich soil in which to build an advanced society, the fact that we haven't produced the creativity to produce a more advanced society is not exactly alarming. It says more about the human mind and condition than anything else.

Uhm, we already do all of that stuff that you mentioned with a tiny subset of the population working on all of it, hence the concept of a 'service' economy. We could replace 'service' with any number of alternative concepts that could advance humanity far more significantly.

There are no real shortages of food or shelter at this time. We should be able to support a very large number of people working on human development: scientists and technologists, medical professionals and even wide-spread service jobs, especially if better paid.

Unfortunately, for money to prove it's worth, too many things must be made scarce. It is this scarcity driven by the people who already have money and their servants in the system that are going to drive the current collapse, if it is happening (and I certainly think it is).

What's mocking about the entire thing is that to retire with a 401k is to join the rent-seeking class. I imagine there is some dark society that could exist where all the food was produced with automation and all that existed otherwise was ownership of that and other automation, producing nothing of value other than the already specious concept of wealth.

I'm exhausted of the pandemic situation as well, but working from home is not the main driver. The enormous reductions in social interaction, random and intentional, is my primary driver.

No gyms, clubs, bars, libraries, etc., and now I find that whenever I get even short social interactions I'm extremely delighted. I think that these social interactions is one of the main drivers of the desire to work in the office, not productivity or any other metric.

For the as long as I've been alive, the human collective has destroyed natural areas, polluted, and harmed human populations that were unable to defend themselves, all in the interest of serving "the economy".

Well, those ideals have come home for many parts of the world. Imperialism and disregard for human welfare will now serve "the economy", as we are seeing now in the United States.

I find it ethically abhorrent, but humans are humans.

First, I learned how to use Anki & the Image Occlusion add-on (which is fantastic and y'all should donate to the creator if you use it).

Then I went onto http://gregg.angelfishy.net/anunit01.shtml and I created anki cards out of all of the words and images in the anniversary edition.

I'm currently working through that deck, and have about a month or two to go before I've at least seen how it all works, and then I'll have to start journaling & writing regularly to produce fluency.

Because writing in cursive/freehand both require planning, planning which is not required by typing. In fact, I will argue that Gregg requires more mental planning and activity than writing in freehand, due to a number of factors about how it is written.

I've seen this in studies before, and it is taught in the class "Learning How to Learn". Ever since I took this class, I have kept extensive hand written notes that I then turn into Cloze Anki cards. This takes forever, though. Handwriting is very slow.

To resolve this, I am currently taking time off from new classes to learn Gregg Shorthand. Soon, I'll be able to handwrite faster than I can type, and will get the same brain engagement that I know arises from handwriting. It is my hope that I can eventually write at the rate that I think, which is a major boon to the creative process of writing and storytelling.

This article, like other things I've read in books like "The Organized Mind", or the class "Learning How to Learn" is that learning for adults is usually difficult not because of reduced learning capacity, but instead individual behaviors, emotional regulation, and culture.

Dr. Levetin suggests that it's mostly around how much frustration you can handle, and how much time you think you have left vs. the amount of value you'll get from what you are learning. Procrastination, a great killer of self-education, is primarily driven by low emotional intelligence/regulation.

This is exactly what I get from this article again: the issue is not brain plasticity in learning, but the willingness to be frustrated, a desire to learn new things (we can't all be Paul Erdos) and the time to learn.

Extreme social compliance and social comparison, two things that are also built into the hardware.

And yet we are now looking at the obesity epidemic from the production side, rather than blaming people. The food itself hijacks important systems that are parts of our hardware. As the movie demonstrates, social media all too often does the same thing: hijacks the hardware. And as humans, we have a lot of important social instincts that are built in. Companies should not be permitted to take advantage of it: Artificial intelligences that plan feeds to addict us should be illegal, in my not so humble opinion.