theprotocol

Doing that made me feel insecure. Reading this helps with that.

Looks like this is addressed here: https://www.bepuentertainment.com/blog/2019/1/16/-but-gpus-a...

This is very impressive! But honestly I am here to comment about the humor in the demo video. The section towards the end starting from the shrinkwrapped newts genuinely made me laugh.

I have privacy concerns with fitness trackers, so I did a search and found this: https://github.com/Freeyourgadget/Gadgetbridge

Seems very interesting, if this project is any good (certainly looks like it is) I may just get one of the supported devices.

To add another n=1, I have severe allergies, not quite life threatening but almost (partial but significant throat constriction upon exposure), and I've never had a cavity and seem almost incapable of getting one. I only brush one time, at night, and don't use toothpaste (couldn't find one I wasn't mildly sensitive to).

It is established that immune cells are modulated by microbiota - and yes, there are oral microbiota, and there are even oral probiotic supplements one can take which seem to be effective for certain conditions. If you are interested in this topic, I'd recommend paying close attention to how the 2 main strains were discovered (S. Salivarius K12 and M18) - iirc. at least one of the two was first extracted from a child who had no cavities.

You're right. However, being there and doing low-impact work like planning the next day in my head yields the same suspicion.

I've had trouble finding a workplace that understood this. Even on the days where I put in 5-6 hours of high quality work I'd attract the suspicion of managers.

After that they typically begin to "check on me" regularly to make sure I'm not "slacking." This would go on long-term.

I have never worked anywhere where this didn't happen.

Can we stop pretending birth rate decline couldn't self-stabilize? I don't see populations organically shrinking to 0 as a realistic scenario.

I for one am tired of extremely misguided and unjustified attempts at engineering everything on the planet.

I find the more studies I read, the higher the stakes seem, because the theories I've read are highly contradictory yet their proponents seem very polarized and very sure of themselves. Some theories that have been prematurely accepted by some groups are going to be very, very wrong.

The easiest example of this sort of highly polarized dynamic is in the realm of diets.

Amyloid plaque accretion reminds me of cholesterol accretion, and there is a recent school of thought whereby:

- Heart disease is actually caused by metabolic syndrome (read: same cause as diabetes)

- Alzheimers is analogous to diabetes (some are calling it Type 3)

I'm not convinced of the above, but it's interesting.

I really really appreciate the detailed writeup on the design/engineering. Thanks for doing this!

I think you're greatly underestimating how much more cumbersome torrenting is even compared to a plugin, especially for "normal" users who are not necessarily tech-savvy.

This would be an authoritarian action, compared to just opting out of supporting something. There's a huge difference and I think these organizations' supposed interest in ethics precludes that sort of move.

DRM is not illegitimate. It just sucks and operates in a way that is immune to free market competition - the reasons for that immunity are the true thing to fix. Users should have alternatives as there is a clear market there. If DRM is so bad, then that's what should kill it.

This is the most plausible outcome. Netflix wouldn't just leave that money on the table and the most obvious thing to do would be to provide the support they want from browsers themselves.

Users follow use cases and would not be averse to spending 30 seconds installing something in order to watch their favorite content.

There's also sort of a game theory situation with the removal of DRM, as it would be a competitive advantage being the only one that supports it.

>I think I've blabbered on for long enough

I thought it was a great post. #7 in particular is excellent advice, which too few people practice.

At this point in my life I have gotten sick of almost every recipe I read and every meal I order in restaurants tasting like garlic. It is such a stereotypical "chefy" ingredient that it's become a crutch.

The last 3 restaurant meals I've had were different dishes from different restaurants with different cuisines, but thinking back on them, they all essentially tasted like garlic. It is prominent even when the cook tries to use it as a background flavor and it seems it cannot just be an added note or accent; in my experience it always ends up taking over the dish. It might be called "chicken breast" or "spaghetti" but in terms of taste it's really garlic-y chicken, or garlic-tasting tomatoes on top of pasta.

I don't remember how I ran into this article, but I found it somewhat vindicating.

This comes off as a weak gimmick behind which there is very little substance.

I did my best ever learning working with a peer who had about the same skill level as me. We grew together and exchanged notes about things we learned.

I also wanted to say in my last comment that most government endorsed diets only recommend limiting added sugar.

Also, much of that bro-science is now being promoted by many MDs and there's a good chance you'll see some of it become officially adopted in the coming years (and I say this as someone who sees this as a pendulum swing instead of adopting what we learned moderation).

Most national dietary guidelines seem to be fairly high in carbs imho.

There is a huge debate currently, between government endorsed diets, plant-based, and keto, and each group is able to cite numerous studies that contradict the others'.

Because metabolic insulinemia is out of control these days and I find the keto people's studies quite convincing (look into Ivor Cummins' presentations on YouTube), in addition to hearing similar points of view even in some anti-keto diets. It seems pretty likely to me that sugar is very easy for us to over-consume in modern lifestyles.

Less convincing to me is the full-on keto diet itself. It's great that it exists as it started an excellent conversation on diet, but I rule it out because most cultures' dietary staples have been starchy carbs.

The problem imho is:

- It's too easy to overconsume carbs in modern lifestyles, and some of the carbs we consume spike our insulin too much (certain GMO crops in particular).

- It's too easy to consume non-whole-food carbs. Whole foods come with things that reduce the metabolic burden of eating them (fiber, antinutrients like phytates, antioxidants).

- The people who subsisted on carb-based staple foods led significantly more active lifestyles in the past than most people today, and did not have the abundance of food that we do now.

Amid the neverending diet controversy it seems safest to do low carb (non-keto), medium high-quality fat of which a majority is monounsaturated, medium protein - and be aware not to reduce saturated fat too much as it's not that scary after all, but also don't go overboard like some of the somewhat extreme saturated fat advocates that have appeared in the last few years.

Background: We had rescued a baby sparrow with an injured leg. There was no way to return it to its nest (it was at the nestling stage), and we'd already seen dozens die and not a single one get rescued by the parents after falling throughout the years (zerg rush of very big ants; cats; other insects) so we made the call to try and rehabilitate this one (there were no wildlife rehabilitators where we lived at the time).

She thrived and reached a point where she could be released, which we tried to do. She took it as us teaching her how to fly, and kept circling back and then looking at us like "hey guys, what do we do next?" After a bit of flying lessons she'd go back into her cage and sit in the back corner, away from the door, and after a while we'd have to bring the cage back into the house. After trying this a few times over a few weeks it became clear she had no intention of leaving, and she was starting to show social behavior towards us. She loved our routine. I would sit close to her cage whenever we ate, and she'd come up and eat at the same time. If we were late, she'd perch on the food thing and try and make eye contact with us (not eating until we did).

One time she produced a sort of "emergency" chirp. I had never heard it before yet it worked and made me realize she was calling for help. I went over to check on her, and she was sitting in the back corner of her cage, looking concerned. The large cage door had been stuck in the open position back when one of us was changing her food. I closed it and she was relieved.

One day I sat in a different place from usual and she was unhappy about it. She kept trying to get as high up in her cage as possible in order to get a look at me and make eye contact. She didn't eat very much and was looking a bit concerned. She was relieved again when I got up and talked to her. Later on we made sure not to change the seating arrangements.

Her ability to interact with us was on the same level as one of the more intelligent dog breeds. She would sometimes play games with us. Sparrows can be cheeky. Her bed time was a sort of game. We'd say the magic words and she'd understand, so she'd go into a corner of her cage and when we'd cover it with a piece of cloth, that'd be the darkest part. The bottom of her cage was transparent so she'd look at us through the plastic and swipe at it with her beak, like the normal beak-cleaning routine birds did. But she'd do it repeatedly (10+ times) whenever she was happy, and she loved when we got close to the cage and made eye contact through the plastic as she snuggled for bed.

Another time she made a unique kind of sound, designed to attract our attention. I went to see what that was about, and she made eye contact with me. She picked up a small piece of hardened bread (we fed her bread and it would get hard after a while) and dunked it in the water, and gobbled it down while looking at me. She was proud of her discovery that you could make hard bread edible again, and wanted to show it off.

She lived with us for about 20 years and sadly died of old age in August of 2016.

- Try and list people who work there, who are on your side, as references when applying.

- I know LinkedIn is hated, but in my experience, employers do check it. Ask someone who is on your side to write a brief blurb about working with you (it's a site feature, can't remember if it's called "reference" or something else).

- Maybe swallow your pride and try and smooth things over with the ex-employers by sending them a positive sounding email wishing them the best of luck, and mentioning how you enjoyed working with them. You might mention that it was constructive for you to leave since you felt like you needed to move on for personal reasons and it was for the best (a nice way of saying you disagreed with them but no hard feelings). Do not mention references/background checks or that you could need anything from them. However, do mention that if they need something from you, e.g. some explanation or document that they need, you might be able to assist them. If they aren't terrible people, they might view this as a satisfactory answer to their question of "what the hell was his problem?!" and give them something to rationalize what they perceived as you being cranky, and thus put the drama to rest ("he just needed to move on" or something to that effect).

Doubtful, as the original word remains obscure.

Incidentally, I discovered the word by Googling "opposite of serendipity" after coming to realize that I experienced a chain of unfortunate black swan events in my life, with the planets aligning (metaphorically, of course) in order to screw me over.

Well written article (or is it an excerpt from Montgomery's book, itself discussing an excerpt from another book? I can't quite tell). My ADHD didn't stand a chance and I couldn't stop reading.

From my experience, I am certain that animals' feelings are intuitively compatible with those of humans, and concur with the suggestion that "anthropodenial" is more of a fallacy than anthropomorphism is typically thought to be.

I've raised many creatures and interacted with them throughout their lives, as have many people. I am confident most people who have experienced this would agree that interspecies communication can happen intuitively (I didn't receive any particular training yet managed strikingly complex communication with creatures as small as a sparrow). I wonder if this is an instinct, and whether it corresponds to some evolutionary advantage that would kick in after basic needs (read: self-defense, hunting) are met.

Missed your post. Thanks for the advice, although I must say I am skeptical of plant-based. I will research it some more though.

I'm working on it, but it's very challenging because of my chronic illness, which unfortunately is worse at night.

Thank you for the advice.

I'm working remotely now so it is indeed a self-reinforcing thing.

But the reason I work remotely now is that I was constantly being watched when working in offices and it burned me out very, very fast having to keep up the appearance of working after a 2-3h run, or else be penalized.

How would this be reconciled with significant weight loss often being a symptom of type 2 diabetes?