Take it one day at a time. I have been overweight pretty much my whole life, and recently lost about 30 lbs. You have to just take these things a day at a time. You aren't going to lose 30 lbs in a day, a week, or even a month. You need to make sure EVERY day is a victory moving you closer to your goal. For me that was controlling what I ate to make sure I was in a calorie deficit. For you this could be something like meeting/talking to a new person EVERY DAY to build your network, or studying a certain amount of hours per day, etc. If you let one day slip, then you will let another slip, so you have to make the effort to keep disciplined. The second thing is tracking that you are on the right path. Again for me that was using a weight scale, but you should define your own metrics. Good luck, and start TODAY!
I think it's not so black and white. When you eat meat you essentially eat what the animal ate. Wild elk is going to be a different "red meat" from factory farmed beef that ate only low nutrition corn grown with pesticides
When you buy $10 of crypto you are passing that $10 to another person, so the amount of money is unchanged. You receive a promise for $10 for some point in the future essentially. If that goes up, you now have a promise for $12, for example. If there is $1 trillion in crypto that suddenly goes up to $2 trillion then an extra trillion in promises were created that would put extra pressure on the existing amount of dollars in existence if they were all redeemed at once (inflation). If the money supply remains unchanged and crypto prices change, then it can increase/decrease the demand for dollars.
XMPP, bittorrent, now blockchain. All 3 have the same thing in common that they had high hopes of creating a distributed alternative future for their paradigm. The first 2 fizzled into mostly fringe usage. I guess we'll have to wait and see if blockchain follows the same path, but seems to be going that way
There has been a meme circulating on Reddit about Roman road quality vs. modern roads with the joke being that we forgot how to make roads. With the response:
Roman engineering was phenomenal, there's no denying that. But modern roads work entirely differently. They are intended for a radically different usage (modern vehicles traveling at high speeds and carrying heavy loads. They also need to be built quickly and cheaply, since we need far more of them than the Romans did. It makes far more sense to make roads which are cheap and quick to build, and then resurface them when they begin to wear out. Poor quality of roading in the 21st century is entirely down to economics and politics. Under-spending on infrastructure and cutting corners in building are the main culprits. If we wanted to build roads that would last thousands of years we could do it, but it would require spending radically more money, and not having any cars or trucks drive on it for the first 18-21 centuries after they're built (as was the case with Roman roads).
The same is true in other industries. For example, most of the cooking in a professional kitchen is done by the more junior cooking staff. The head chef doesn't actually cook much, but handles more logistics like the ordering of the food/wines and dealing with suppliers, planning the menu, maintaining a high level of service.
This is end stage capitalism greed. It's a full blown assault on the consumer. The trust that citizens have in their retails is being mortgaged for desperate profits. The quality of the products is dropping to possibly dangerous levels. There's no quality control. The products that you are buying could be full of toxic, carcinogenic, reproductive harm chemicals. The cast iron pan you buy has lead in it. The kids toys are using toxic paints. The cotton clothes you are buying are not cotton.
That's nothing compared to what worse things could actually be happening. There doesn't seem to be any quality control or authenticity verification on any of these marketplaces including Amazon. Good case scenario the item you buy is a high quality fake. Worst case scenario it's a low quality fake. Filled with toxic chemicals (without the warning that it is carcinogenic or causes reproductive harm etc.) Are you buying kids toys from these marketplaces? Food items, clothes, kitchenwares, face masks, anything really.
Remote vs. in office has no difference in productivity from what I've seen. Most of in office communication is still over slack/chat. When collaboration is needed usually a tv screen is needed to screen share since two people sitting at one laptop is uncomfortable, and video chat screen share is better for that anyways. On top of that you don't have to wait for a meeting room that may be booked at the moment you want to collaborate.
Another big thing is the psychological effect of being a chair warmer. Sitting in an office environment, and being "seen" gives the impressing of working. Imagine seeing someone in their chair before and after you leave each day. It gives the impression that they are "working hard". With remote only there is no chair warming, you have to show results.
That's 140 million people. That's 140 million potential voters. It's amazing how well democracies work considering this. I mean that's a pretty drastic example. Imagine for something more obscure and nuanced. It goes to show the power that media, social media, etc. can have on controlling thought. I doubt all those people were born with this opinion.
On the flip side I have thought about getting into reverse osmosis as a side business. Afaik reverse osmosis does remove microplastics and most other harmful things from tap water. And on top of that it makes better tasting tea and coffee imo.
On top of that, reverse osmosis can get drinking water from sea water. It seems that the feasibility of reverse osmosis is directly related to available energy, but wouldn't that be a great use of excess produced electricity vs. storing in batteries?
Of all the things humanity should be looking to make technological improvements in reverse osmosis, or even better solutions (electrolysis?, distilling?), should be pretty high up.
Is there any examples of using something like a server farm to heat a building in the winter? Removing heat from a server farm through heat exchange with a cold building seems like an efficient combination of two interests (building needs heat, servers need to get rid of heat). Of course this becomes a problem in the summer months...
VLC is a pretty viable alternative, and it has client apps for pretty much every platform. There could be some basic features added to make it a bit more usable (text search/filtering), but for basic use cases it works pretty good for me
If there is any next Google (or Google Search competitor) it would be, in my mind, something like Wolfram Alpha. I can search for things like today + 160 days and get much more rich results (as a simple example). Google does have some features like this already such as weather/climate, calculator, translate, etc. This area however is much weaker than I would like it to be. Wolfram can tell me how long it will take me to get a sunburn in my current location, and all kinds of stuff like that. Virtual assistants like Siri and "OK Google" might be heading in this direction, but why can't I ask "Ok Google, I will take a photo, then can you compress it and send it as an email attachment to Dave from work." Or something along those lines...
What about the Victorian period made this possible? Seems strange that we have so much more wealth and efficiencies now (even just refrigeration/freezers as one example) yet seem to have gone backwards in this regard. What could be the underlying cause of this?
Yes, but some processes ARE well defined, and you want to ensure the steps of it are all met correctly each time. This could be similar to the checklists airplane pilots use, or surgeons as extreme examples.
I wonder how much of the "managing processes" part could be delegated to software tools? How many of these processes could be automated, or "managed" by some sort of workflow software. Would it be possible with the right software product to essentially distribute the role of manager across the team/company?
SQL can be somewhat reusable through views. Also in your code you can make reusable functions that contain SQL queries. You won't get the best performance reusing the queries this way, but you can put them into a transaction and build up more complex flows from reusable pieces that way
Will have to read more about Taylorism, thanks for putting this on my radar.
I can see how the post reviews could be toxic, but pre estimates could also be toxic especially if estimates suddenly become hard deadlines. I think it comes down to nuance in both cases.
Post estimates could tie into performance reviews and bonus allocation as well. Where your bonus and performance would be a tight feedback loop, and determined by multiple peers vs. a single manager.
It really depends on each individual org which way works best
This is why it can be better to just -prioritize- without -estimating-. Make sure you clearly and strategically prioritize the work to do, and plan for continuous delivery, or release milestones. Assume that your engineers will work just as fast as if they made inaccurate estimates (keep in mind overestimates might result in engineers slacking off to fill the over estimated time). You can always look at the work that engineers deliver, see how long it took them, and senior engineers will be able to tell if that engineer spent a reasonable amount of time for that task. You could call this post-estimates vs traditional pre-estimates. So tl;dr: just do good prioritizing and do post-estimates to gauge whether people are slacking off
I don't think "misinformation" is as clear cut as we think it is. For any subject with more than the most trivial complexity there are always multiple ways to view the information.
We could say, "Man stabbed another person in the neck. That man is bad", but what if the stabbing in the neck was for a tracheostomy? Now apply this to even more complex situations.
I think it really comes down to a statement like "there is no truth there is only consensus". How much in this world is objectively true? And before you answer that go back in history and look at what we used to think was objectively true and it turned out not to be.
A confirmation bias is not a conclusion, it's a skewing/filtering of how you see something. Read the book "A Thousand Brains" by Jeff Hawkins. The way your brain works fundamentally is that it makes predictions and assumes that the prediction is what will happen (the book explains this better). That's why in my original comment I said " Of course with an amazing interview performance you can switch a predetermined no into a yes, and with a very poor interview you can turn a predetermined yes into a no."