mpalczewski

Is one possible application much cheaper catalytic converters?

The "Do Your Own Research" title is about where he lost me. Without reading, I'm pretty sure the author didn't perform a double blind study himself, nor is he suggesting that we all perform one.

The rest reads like gibberish.

> Which, in this age of cheap ubiquitous dash-cams, isn't nearly as likely to be the "inconvenient waste of time but zero financial risk" deal it used to be

Chance of permanent injury or death is not negligible. e.g. get rear ended by a semi, or just suffer from whiplash that doesn't go away.

You failed at understanding the author.

There's been an upper class for whom food wasn't scarce for thousands of years. Socrates wrote about it, and it was looked down upon as type of gluttony and quite unhealthy. However, even those upper classes, who didn't have any food scarcity did not typically get fat.

Blaming it on food scarcity isn't the whole story. It's not enough that food scarcity stopped. It wasn't carbs either, as there are cultures without carb scarcity that weren't obese(Though we do put corn syrup in everything now).

My guess is that it's a dopamine addiction. We understand that sometimes we must do things we don't like, but the idea of eatings things we don't enjoy scares many people.

It's also how corps package food, and the ones that make their foods the most addicting(the most dopamine -> the most pleasure) survive.

It's an individual struggle for many. Although I'm rather close to the weight I want to be(now) I struggle and have struggled with hunger too. My weight has gone up and down, I too have tried many things. The struggle with hunger is similar regardless of weight, until I get really quite lean.

I have gone from being in perfect control of my weight(I had to make weight for a sport), to being completely out of control(because the stuff that used to work didn't anymore), to being in control again(new stuff worked), to loosing some of the control(because it stopped working, but I found new stuff before it got out of hand again).

Everyone is different, different stuff works for different people and you yourself are different people when your weight changes significantly, as you age, and as your environment and knowledge changes.

Things that effect hunger: fewer bigger meals (unless it doesn't and you do better with more small meals). Protein, fiber (generally less hunger for most people), carbs (varies), fats (ditto). Avoiding trigger foods, (there are some foods and different for everyone, that once you eat a little it causes more hunger and triggers into more eating). Psychological tricks: (1. realize that a state of being somewhat hungry all the time is the normal state that humans lived with for thousands of years, 2. realize that you can burry yourself with work as a good distraction from hunger and get a lot more done at the same time. 3. Realize that "Hunger is the best spice" - Epictetus 4. Every time you catch yourself thinking about the costs of dieting(hunger), make sure you spend even more time thinking about the benefits. Exercise: figure out what exercises increase and decrease hunger for you, today. Liquid calories: your body doesn't register them and sometimes registers them negatively, best avoided all together. If you need a treat, prefer the ice cream over the milk shake. Cinnabon's highest calorie item is a drink.

I wish you the best, I hope something I said may help.

Obesity started to be a thing in the last 100 years. It wasn't evolution.

The rural populations seems would not like a redistricting where every district is dominated by its largest population center. Essentially this voronoi type redistricting would push more power towards cities at the cost of rural areas.

> What I would like to know is, why it's okay for a few people to lie about the gravity of a pandemic and cost us 1M of our countrymen.

1M people died but the way your sentence is framed is that without those lies 1M people wouldn't have died. That looks like quite the intent to deceive, which makes it look like you are the liar. Why is it ok for you?

Furthermore it's quite obfuscated. Yes people lied about the pandemic(every politician lies, it's like a contest to elect the best liar). I'm willing to bet some of those lies saved lives(just by chance, who knows).

So directly in answer to your question. Speech should be free because that's how society advances, free speech is how you question the current dogma, it's how society moves forward. There's costs and benefits. Charlatan will con people. The way you deal with charlatans is by exposing them with better speech.

Banning speech is weak sauce for people that don't know how to be convincing.

> What I would like to know is, how countries just as capable as us manage to lead better lives despite not having free reign over discussions on Nazis.

I live a pretty good life as an immigrant. Can't complain. Great country, wouldn't want to be anywhere else. The country where I come from does not have "free reign over discussions on Nazis".

> I haven't really heard anyone use anything but propaganda based circular logic or slippery slope fallacies to answer why unbridled free speech is necessary.

That's an admission that you really haven't heard or considered the best argument for free speech. If you can only state arguments from one side of an issue, you haven't made up your mind, it was made for you.

I've been meditating regularly for at least 10 years now. My own selfish tendencies have increased and decreased during that time, it doesn't seem related. I think meditating is rather selfish, it's doing something for yourself, and that's ok. I primarily meditate because it helps me focus. I think it helps me deal with stress and helps me sleep better. I don't attempt any particular pose as most of the cross legged stuff is painful and has caused injuries.

First quarter gdp was negative, we could very well be in a recession and not know it.

What's surprising to me about this, is that if you ever read the risk section of a 10-k it is basically a bunch of non sense, where they imagine every possible risk no matter how small a business might have. It's filled with so many low probability scenarios it's barely worth reading. If they put in a blurb about this in the risks section I'm not sure who would even notice.

At first glance, I suspect that they just copy pasted the risk section from the last 10-k and this was just some mistake rather than an intention to deceive. Anybody who knew anything about the business understood that crypto mining was a sizable part of that demand.

That's a good idea, a very reasonable way of doing it.

Would be totally fine with an even higher(25cent) disposal fee. Makes no difference to the 4 times a year user, the frequent user gets a reusable straw.

coffee is an everyday thing for many people.

Bubble tea is a 1-4 times a year thing for me. I prefer not to carry a bag.

carrying around a straw is less practical than just not having bubble tea.

I've been impressed with the products I buy from them.

Bought their nano pro duo usb-c power brick, works great.

Replaced my dying roomba with a Eufy, I sold the roomba on Ebay with full disclosure that it was dying and bought the Eufy, the eufy is quieter, has lasted longer, and while it doesn't clean quite as well, it does the job and doesn't beat my rug.

I like their cables.

I replaced my nest cam, with one of their security cameras, it sends nothing to the cloud and stores everything on a memory card. Camera was half the price, higher resolution, tilts and swivels. No monthly fee. Works with homekit.

Their stuff is never the best, but the price/performance ratio frequently can't be beat.

> Why do you trust HN comments over research?

I don't, that's a misinterpretation of the meaning I intended.

I wrote

> > It is true that very little research has value. It is true that very little information is worth reading.

That's just the nature of research and information.

Most research isn't going to lead to anything, and that's ok because the stuff that does lead to something more than makes up for it.

I'm pretty sure that most of the stuff I read and most of the research that is done has mostly entertainment value. What do you remember that made a difference in your life that you read five years ago. I'm willing to bet it's a small percentage of the stuff you read.

> The researchers test their ideas in reality, in this case with over 300 people, and carefully analyze the results.

Did they though(carefully analyze their results)? They didn't share their dataset. They didn't calculate one variance, or one p-value.

> The same researcher could post a HN comment in 30 seconds, with no basis, and for some reason some people would believe that more.

People tend to believe the last argument they hear(unless they think it is obvious bullshit). Perhaps post a counter argument.

Also, the parent of this context, had a rather strong basis.

Bayesian probabilities are different from frequentist probabilities. An abridged summary:

Frequentist probability is about the limit that something approaches after many repetitions. e.g. rolling a dice. It works well in a casino and some quantum physics applications but mostly fails outside of that. e.g. we want to know what the probability of a team winning the next superbowl is, or what is the probability of life on Mars. A frequentist would say that question doesn't make sense, there's either life on mars or there isn't, there's going to only be one result of the next superbowl.

Bayesian probability is about the degree of belief. It is about how to update the degree of belief based on prior knowledge and observations. e.g. If we thought there was life on mars, we should see some evidence of it, we don't see evidence so we should adjust our prior belief of the probability of life on mars downward. It answers the questions we want to ask, but those answers frequently depend on what priors you choose, and if those priors can sometimes dominate the analysis.

> If I listened to HN comments, very little research would have value, very little information would be worth reading. The top comment is almost always of this nature; it's depressing to me that it still happens; we all should be very familiar by now with social media and these patterns, yet we keep following them.

If you listened to HN comments, you would have a more accurate model of reality.

It is true that very little research has value. It is true that very little information is worth reading.

The hard part is figuring out which is that little bit.

> It's easier just to pirate than keep up with all these streaming services.

It really isn't and it's only cheaper if you don't put much value on your time.

Radarr and Sonarr don't do anything automatically. Setting them up takes more time than they are worth. I tried installing them. Most would describe me as technically savvy, but I just gave up.

example issues. Here's the quick start guide. https://wiki.servarr.com/radarr/quick-start-guide 1. Get stopped immediately at the indexer. No sane defaults there at all. No guidance either.

Plex doesn't do 4k streaming to Apple TV, doesn't do 4k to chromecast.

The movies you pirate frequently have technical problems, usually the sound is off. You are lucky to have subtitles that work(synced correctly).

When you become a US citizen they ask you to renounce other citizenships. At least it was the case the for me.

The problem with foundation wasn’t what you state. The problem is that they changed the story so much from the books that it doesn’t resemble them and they got the central theme exactly backwards.

You can turn it off, but would you. Would you risk turning it off at work where everyone else that looks at your doc sees the purple and you never even got a heads up.

I've always understood "folks" to mean parents. Not sure I understand how this is a better term.

In general I agree, that the root cause tends to be a supply constraint. Even if there were a bunch of people buying up houses, at least in theory that should make rents go down.

However, in places like Vancouver people are buying up property as a place to park money and they remain unoccupied. Policies like additional taxes on unoccupied or secondary residences. Seem like one good way of adding supply.

> capitalism

If capitalism caused censorship you would expect the least capitalist places to have the least censorship but the opposite is true.

California, sort of: They figure out what sort of place you own, pigeon hole it with other "similar" places and charge you more per kilowatt hour if you use more than they think you need. It's a procrustean bed approach.

I finally found a full proof way of making any egg easy to peel. I wonder if it would work with eggs like these. I pressure steam then in an instant pot for about three minutes.

> “Real price of gold” is an interesting concept, probably showing a statistical quirk of backtracing CPI than anything useful though? I’d have to study how it was calculated.

I agree it's interesting. I'm invested in Gold, so I'm basically betting that it's going to go up. Instinctively, I'm looking for the best disconfirming evidence.

Here's where I got the chart. http://scottgrannis.blogspot.com/2022/03/inflation-net-worth...

> If you’re going to step outside of the fiat viewpoint, gold is where I’d usually start. > Maybe a VIX-adjusted price of gold or something like that could be useful to smooth it out.

yeah, I'm not really sure what the best way to look at it is. I believe Adam Smith used minimum price of labor, but that's distorted as a signal by minimum wage laws. I find the big mac index to be useful-ish. idk, perhaps something like median cost of an hour of labor per big mac, is a measure of prosperity.

> If you re-price the market in another unit of measure, like “ounces of gold”, you will get an entirely different picture.

If you price the dollar in terms of ounces of gold, then you would think that the dollar is worth more than it was in September of 2011, and you would think that the dollar is worth more now than it was in August of 2020. While gold is stable over the long term e.g. centuries, its price can be quite erratic over the short term.

You can price it in barrels of oil, silver, copper, a collection of other currencies, bitcoin, median house price and get a different answer each time.

> The reason why markets go up when the Fed seems completely unconcerned or helpless to stop the worst inflation in decades, is because people are betting that this trend will continue.

It's a global phenomenon. We've got less production of goods and commodities because of covid and just as much if not more demand. So supply down, demand even or even up. What do you expect to happen?

While the USD has problems, other currencies seem even worse at the moment.

There is not some other fiat currency at the moment that is better than the USD. Things that people think are hedges BTC(Ponzi scheme), Gold(volatile) don't always work well.

e.g. here is real(inflation adjusted) gold prices. https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiyWSImAdvN...

it doesn't look all that cheap at the moment.

> If you re-price the market in another unit of measure, like “ounces of gold”, you will get an entirely different picture.

Like this? https://schrts.co/pAKzMCFc

> in America, nobody is forcing anyone to take a vaccine so the position wouldn't make any sense.

Employers, en masse, are forcing it as a condition of employment.

I do agree with some of these employer mandates, e.g. airlines, because they increase connectivity and thus spread. Not so much with some others, e.g. clerical stay at home workers.