thelean12

> Crypto data includes the “institutional” addresses such as exchanges. For example, the top Ethereum address is one of Binance’s, meaning that it isn’t all owned by one entity (although some might argue about that.)

So doesn't that make this analysis useless?

It's not that exposure doesn't have value. It's that unpaid positions start to collapse the industry if it becomes too common.

SAG has minimum day rates for a reason. I imagine major studios could find plenty of people to do speaking roles "for exposure" to the point where no low level people have any real leverage to make any kind of living from MASSIVE corps. The massive corps would get free labor by exploiting the hopes and dreams of low level actors. The free market gets weird and fragile without unions here.

Photography doesn't have the same union powers, so we rely on public shaming as much as possible.

> “Learn fashion” is hard to place on here. On the one hand, ensuring that you comb the crumbs out of your beard daily and wear clothes that fit better than a garbage bag is essential. On the other, becoming “into fashion” when it’s not a natural interest is often more of advice for advice’s sake unless you’re targeting a very fashion-conscious woman (or the fashion-forward portion of the gay dating pool).

Yeah I mean, I think most of the things on the list have a "basic" and "advanced" tier.

Lose weight/hit the gym: Basic is to not be obese. Advanced is to be fit.

Small talk: Basic is to be able to start and hold a conversation. Advanced is to be smooth and captivating.

Learn fashion: Basic is learning how clothes are supposed to fit. Advanced is... something like what you said. (I'm not advanced here! haha).

You responded to the wrong person. I didn't write that.

Generally agree with you. I guess I was looking at it a little differently. If I'm talking to an individual, the only thing that matters is what they can do to better themselves now. It's not productive, on an individual level, to say stuff like "if only society was better!"

> I try and fail to get them to open up about their feelings about this or anything else.

To be fair, opening up about my feelings to my family sounds awful. I know I know, society did this to me yada yada.

I learned by watching and doing, not talking about my feelings to my family. College buddies being my wingman and showing me the ropes, etc. and failing until I stopped failing. Then again, last time I dated, "can I buy you a drink" still worked to get a few minutes of face time and I didn't need apps. Not sure what's out there now.

I think talking about my feelings to my family would have done absolutely nothing.

This is much more convincing than dnissley's response to me. I wonder how many "incels" have suffered trauma in their childhood.

I certainly don't expect people to just work through childhood trauma without societal help. ex. Make it cheap, easy, and acceptable to get therapy. Much different than my list above IMO where most people can work on it themselves without many excuses.

I'm not convinced it's the same. When talking about dating, there are a bunch of stuff that you can do that boils down to "make yourself a better person." See: my list above. It's obviously not guaranteed, and many are more genetically gifted than others, but it seems way more manageable of a task than your example.

You can't expect women to work on having more of a penis.

I'm assuming the rule is around because FB knows it's targeting isn't 100% accurate and it might ruffle feathers if an ad claims you're something you're not. I don't see that specifically as nefarious.

Especially because FB tells me why I am being shown an ad already.

> if you can't get women, it's entirely your fault

I'm curious, and this will probably be too curt but I am honestly trying to figure it out: Whose fault is it? Because incels believe it's the women's fault, and this message is the opposite.

It doesn't seem productive to tell them that it's society's fault or some other external thing. What are they supposed to do about that?

Most men that I know, including myself, function better when there's something tangible to work on. Lose weight, hit the gym, learn to lower my ego, listen better, practice small talk, learn about fashion, etc.

I think there's a healthy way to "blame" yourself. Or if you want a nicer way to put it: to be able to have honest criticism of yourself. After all, if you can't fix it, what's the point?

> Another way to phrase the original top comment (which, btw, is very deservedly the top comment): "If you can't be happy on your own, there's no way you'll be happy with a partner."

Why does everyone in this thread like posting definitive statements like this? As if it's universally true?

Life isn't as black and white as people like to think.

I was not much of a happy person before I found my (now) wife many years ago. She helps me deal with life in a way no therapist could ever do (and vise versa, me to her). We're in it together and help each other.

I could not figure out how to be happy on my own. Once I found my partner, I was able to be happy.

This isn't universal, of course. Many people are able to be happy on their own, but it's so strange reading definitive stuff like "there's no way!" when it's just not black and white.

No where did I say doctors don't make mistakes.

Everywhere did I say that you are much more likely to make mistakes than your doctors.

I didn't put much thought into that phrasing. Changed it to "settled" instead to better reflect reality.

Austin seems to take corp-speak to another level. See his response when they settled with the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26948258

> On the margin, however, a well-researched patient will almost always be better informed than a physician accustomed to the average patient. This is particularly relevant to the ~130 IQ HN populace.

It's quite dangerous and egotistical to think that you are in that group, though. When most people think they're a better than average driver, many are bound to be wrong.

If you think you're right about something and the doctor is wrong, get a second opinion. Don't assume you know better than a medical professional.

Someone responded with a good question but then deleted it: Aren't you allowed to disagree with your doctor?

Sure, in the sense that you can get second opinions if you're extra concerned about the topic.

If you're pregnant or have a blood clotting issue, by all means get a first and second opinion if you're worried about getting the vaccine.

But don't think that you are more qualified than medical professionals to understand the risks and side effects (unless of course you are a medical professional).

I see a couple different scenarios:

1. Do your own research -> see something concerning -> ask your doctor to verify/interpret -> follow doctor's orders

2. Do your own research -> see something concerning -> accept your research as truth

#1 is valid and good.

#2 is bad.

This has always been the case.

I agree that leaping to conclusions isn't science. It doesn't get past the hypothesis stage and needs proper study.

That said, if the massive reduction in flu cases isn't a result of some or all of our Covid efforts, it'd be a hell of a coincidence.

On the other hand, I don't think I've ever gotten a cold/the flu, at least not since I was a young kid, and I don't take much care to do anything on your list. Sure, I'll wash my hands after using a restroom or before prepping food. But I'll definitely walk into a restaurant (pre-covid) and just start eating a burger without washing my hands first.

I feel the biggest factor is just what body and immune system you have... Some people I know just get sick constantly, multiple times a year, and they don't seem to do much of anything differently than I do. I don't think they're secretly licking doorknobs when no one is looking.

> People just desperately want to find evidence that the stuff we did this year made a huge difference.

I don't think that's true at all. People have been receptive to the increased evidence that transmission on surfaces is pretty unlikely, for example, despite all the efforts we've put into sanitizing surfaces.

I think most people can appreciate that all the shit we threw at the wall throughout the pandemic eventually comes down to how much effort it is vs how much benefit we get from it. And our understanding of each measure has changed over time. We now know, generally:

Masks indoors are low-effort, medium reward. Masks outdoors are low-effort, low reward.

Cleaning surfaces is medium-effort, low reward.

Staying home is (economically, societally) high-effort, high reward.

Not quite as simple as you make it out to be.

Why should I let you scream "fuck you" over and over again in my coffee shop?

Yeah yeah, maybe social networks are the new town square blah blah. My point is that the line isn't so black and white.

SpaceX also blew up a huge amount of their Falcon rockets at the beginning too, and now they're consistently bringing astronauts to the ISS and payloads into orbit. So I'm not sure what your point is.

> users may even be thankful for it

That's really just something we tell ourselves to feel better about serving ads. It doesn't actually match reality.

They generally have a reputation to uphold so others don't just get up and leave.

Some rando leasing it to you can do whatever they want without worrying about any of that.

As someone who has written robot software, it's not as bad as you might think.

You do a LOT of testing before hand, and you do system checks before committing to something. I was always more worried about sensor failures that my software doesn't pick up on.

Then again none of my robots ever cost $80 million dollars and has landed on Mars...

Flipping houses usually means buying a house -> making improvements to the house -> selling it for a profit. I wouldn't call that "speculation".

Speculation in this case could just be buying a house and trying to sell it for a profit later without improving the property.

> Heck, even if it were for everyone, I've yet to see a solid reason why earning a dollar from investing money is somehow better for society than earning a dollar for investing your labor.

It's pretty simple in my mind: Retiring is hard enough, and at some point I won't be able to do any labor. Market investments are the current way that most people are able to retire, whether we like it or not.

Raising it for anything above 1M / year? No problem. They've got enough money to retire comfortably.

For everyone though? My god.

> Now how on earth did that warp to whatever everyone here is smoking?

There's no other option when someone on the same research team later sends them 4 diffs, 3 of which have security holes, than to assume they're still doing research in the same area.

This is what happens when you do a social experiment without at least informing someone in the organization beforehand. There's no way to verify whether it was well intentioned diffs or not. So you must assume it's not.

The Linux team found the source of a security threat and have taken steps to prevent that security threat from continuing to attack them.

You can't break into someone's house through their back window, tell the owners what you did, and not expect to get arrested.

People don't scream "how are we going to know that people can break into houses through broken windows without these heros!?"

On the other hand: What obligation do the Linux kernal maintainers have to allow UMN staff and students to contribute to their project?

I am saying: what are other options besides the two I mentioned, and the one that they're using?

I'm saying that the two I mentioned are absolutely absurd. Not even worth a conversation.

The one they're using is deferring their decision making to a source that, even if they're a bit flawed, is WAY WAY WAY better than themselves when figuring out what is worth keeping online.