This is interesting to me. I've done basically no configuring (except frequent use of a "site:reddit.com" lens) and it's been great. Now when I see Google or Bing results it's jarring how bad they seem.
I'm under the impression that there was a paper on "ego depletion" has sort of become a poster child for p-value hacking. It has sort of poisoned the topic. Upon learning of such a hack one should rationally revert to a null hypothesis, not revert to the assumption that the hacked conclusion was false.
As a climber I see ego depletion happen all the time. You find a crumbly hold, or get harassed by an insect, or whatever else it is, and you conclude that the next move is the crux. Then other people climb it and nobody agrees with you--that move was one of the easier ones. Anecdata, of course, I just wish we could learn from the bad science and then be washed clean, rather than be haunted by it.
I think you'll see this kind of thing in many professions. Some doctors, who are highly specialized and highly trained in their field, act like they should automatically be great at skills they barely have experience with, and then get frustrated when they don't immediately excel or when people with less impressive credentials end up being better at something.
My family member who taught flying to hobbyist pilots always said physicians were the most dangerous students because of their "know-it-all" attitude.
I completely agree. I've never read a 1-star (to me) book because that implies it's unreadable, and anything good enough to keep my attention room is generally 4-stars and rarely 5-stars. I bet if I look at my Goodreads it's 60% 4s, 30% 3s, and 10% 5s
Late to the party, but I know of at least two highly-paid coworkers that already had plans to retire, but are now just hoping for several months of extra pay (it's essentially the only situation where I would recommend someone take this offer-- if it works out, great for them; if it doesn't, well they were going to leave anyway)
The other people it makes sense for (assuming they actually follow through) are those who are remote and don't want to or for some reason cannot move. This gives them an exemption to the RTO order and time to find a job.
This doesn't change the fact that bidets in the US are only in a vanishingly small percentage of homes. As an example, while not at all scientific, open up Zillow or Redfin and look at any random property and see if there's a bidet.
You honestly think there are 10s of millions of people wanting a decongestant in the United States without ID? This is ridiculous and I agree with the other commenter, a bit hyperbolic.
Wow I was surprised by this figure, so I tried to find the source everyone quotes. It appears to be a 2006 telephone survey of 987 randomly-selected voting age citizens that were then weighted for an underrepresentation of race (so perhaps not that accurate). Anecdotally, I work in a safety net hospital and it is really rare for someone to come in without ID, which is why those numbers seemed so surprising to me...
Pretending that government IDs are super duper hard to give out is a time-honored American tradition.
After all, imagine if the government had a database with every person's name in it! You'd have like 300 million rows? Nobody's built a computing machine that could do that. And then how would you get the cards to people? You'd have to send out horses and buggies to every corner of the nation. And where would you find enough coachmen to do that, and roads to drive the coaches on???
No, clearly it's unpossible.
So we have to reserve the use of government IDs for really important things, like checking if you can buy cold medicine, and voting must remain insecure.
Government IDs are not a solved problem, and you don't seem to have even tried to consider the issues involved. The key distinction between voting and cold medicine is that you have a right to vote, but not to buy cold medicine. So if you lost your ID, or it's expired, it is not an option to just say "that sucks, I guess you can't vote now".
In fact, as a rule, ID is reserved for things that aren't important, because it is a point of failure.
The point of India requiring identification for benefits is to prevent waste and fraud. And given the number of poor people in India, and the limited amount of money they have to help them, it seems like quite a good thing to do so.
Identifying people is not hard, even for the poorest countries, and it's quite easy to do with modern technology. There is no good-faith reason to oppose it, any more than there is to oppose driver's licenses.
Did you read the article I linked? You keep saying this is an easy thing to do, but don't seem to acknowledge any of the problems it causes. It is not easy to identify people. It is easy to identify people with 99% accuracy. If the remaining 1% are unable to access society, that is an unacceptable risk.
Consider for instance the people who currently exist, don't have government ID, and don't have an accurate record of their birth. Such people exist. Should they just die, or something?
If you don't have a birth certificate, there are other ways to get an ID card. Immigrants do the US do it all the time. Pretending this is some unsolvable problem is ridiculous. It's like saying we can't collect taxes because it's impossible to identify people. When the government needs money, suddenly it's very possible to identify everyone and send them bills. Funny how that works.
I think these basic facts should be taught in school. Yes, millions don't have ID.
It seems trite to someone in the middle class, but it genuinely is not a priority to certain demographics, given the challenge of getting it. That challenge may seem trivial to a frequenter of Hacker News, but we're a diverse society.
The only barrier to getting a decongestant should be: having the money to pay for it.
No, but why the hell should someone else’s misbehavior cost me time and inconvenience?
The cost of these regulations is millions, perhaps billions of dollars in extra effort, bookkeeping and security by tens of thousands of businesses, not to mention lost productivity and frustration on the part of everyone else evolved, and moats of the costs and inconvenience is borne by people outside the government, who are not committing a crime.
It’s bat shit crazy that bureaucrats are allowed to steal this much productivity from the economy.
I honestly think it's on that order, yes. Anyone who has had a respiratory infection, a sinus headache, or seasonal allergies. Anyone who would take NyQuil. Over the course of 18 years. Why is that so hard to believe? In fact, now that I think about it more, it's probably a lot more.
This article (and many like it) often mention how intuitive and speedy the Dept. of Veterans Affair EMR is. I can guarantee not a single one of these authors has ever used it. CPRS (the VA's EMR) is easily one of the biggest reasons physicians don't want to work at the VA, and most facilities have fewer patients per team (compared to academic or community hospitals) because of how much extra effort is required to use it. It is just startlingly bad.
