DtnB

not to be glib but the fact that its Capitalized and one word rather than 'cold fusion', should be enough no?

While you are right to ward off this person's paranoia and we really shouldn't be completely freaking out about light exposure from our phones and such.

I think you are minimizing the issue. We wear sunglasses when it is bright (and should as it can be harmful to our eyes), we don't stare directly at the sun, we don't have it anywhere near as close to our faces, and we don't have the sunlight at night which adds another 2-4 hours of exposure to blue light.

There would appear to be more intense blue light in an LED than coming from the sun. This page while not a particularly good primary source has some comparisons of the intensity of the blue light in LEDs vs sunlight. https://iristech.co/pwm-flicker/

"The use of blue light is becoming increasingly prominent in our society, and a large segment of the world population is now subjected to daily exposure (from a few minutes to several hours) of artificial light at an unusual time of the day (night). Because light has a cumulative effect and many different characteristics (e.g., wavelength, intensity, duration of the exposure, time of day), it is important to consider the spectral output of the light source to minimize the danger that may be associated with blue light exposure. Thus, LEDs with an emission peak of around 470–480 nm should be preferred to LEDs that have an emission peak below 450 nm. Although we are convinced that exposure to blue light from LEDs in the range 470–480 nm for a short to medium period (days to a few weeks) should not significantly increase the risk of development of ocular pathologies, this conclusion cannot be generalized to a long-term exposure (months to years). Finally, we believe that additional studies on the safety of long-term exposure to low levels of blue light are needed to determine the effects of blue light on the eye."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4734149/

Basically, we shouldn't go out of our way to expose ourselves to excess blue light if we can help it. We don't know what it does entirely. Its not worth losing your mind over either but its not quite simple as 'the sun is blue. you'll be fine'

its not so much 'sussing out tricks' as a blanket ban on anything that can be abused. My parents made roughly 100k when I was going to school but they were terrible with money and have a lot of children. The 'expected contribution' was actually quite high but I never received anything from my parents at all. Thus, I have much in the way of student loans.

Not to take away from your point but the colleges having to work against these sort of tricks has a lot of unintended consequences.

I actually looked into this recently and found some articles(which I have since lost) that explained that it would appear that the delta between blue light in the morning and at night is the mechanism by which our circadian rhythm seems to work.

However, working with the idea that blue light is photo toxic, it is most likely better to reduce your blue light at night rather than increase it in the morning.

I wanted to do this experiment with dosing myself with blue light in the morning but I abandoned that after seeing research on photo toxicity

Perhaps establishing a morning habit of going and standing in front of an east facing window might be a worthy experiment?

Other religions that have kept their popularity and adherents over the centuries(and much in the past century) have, part, reformed and toned down the significance of these violent mythologies especially in their relevance to doctrine. To assert otherwise seems like arguing in bad faith.

if you pay them better they won't leave. But you've basically said that even after training they are worth less than someone you hire in at first. This distinction is why people leave. You trained these people in the way you'd like them to work, Tailor-made to your processes but you still say they aren't worth the same as the people you hire-in. No wonder they leave and go some place where they've now been hired in without needing to be trained. If you don't value your own training highly enough to pay these people the market rate, what reason do you expect them to stay and work for you for?

Do you not see how there is value in having someone who is trained to your specifications? You're still getting labor out of someone but when they move to being a proper dev you don't have to worry about any training issues because you trained them. I truly doubt you hire developers who are productive from day one, when your mentees will be productive from day one as a real dev AND will probably have less growing pains from having learned bad habits or a different standard at another company.

no but the fact that something is not deterministic would preclude the idea that 'basic physics says there is no free will'

how does basic physics tells us there is no free will? That is generally an argument about hard determinism which could be argued is invalidated by The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/opioids/ ?

From another comment:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/restaurant-chains-hit-w...

https://www.phillyemploymentlawyer.com/wage-theft-epidemic-r...

https://www.epi.org/publication/employers-steal-billions-fro...

https://www.restaurant-hospitality.com/legal/la-restaurant-p...

https://www.eater.com/2018/9/25/17886990/how-restaurants-ste...

worked BOH for years, had friends in FOH of many small restaurants and bars for years. Saw all sorts of shady stuff.

data not being the plural of anecodte and all and Not the exact issue but: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/restaurant-chains-hit-w...

https://www.phillyemploymentlawyer.com/wage-theft-epidemic-r...

https://www.epi.org/publication/employers-steal-billions-fro...

https://www.restaurant-hospitality.com/legal/la-restaurant-p...

https://www.eater.com/2018/9/25/17886990/how-restaurants-ste...

Obviously, none of these are scientific studies but I don't know if there are any done in the industry.

What I'm trying to point out is: Wage theft of all types happens all the time and I've known people too poor to risk losing their job who suffered under this issue. I'm sure it doesn't happen often -at scale-, in chain restaurants with big corporate backing but in an industry where most close after their first year and the workers are frequently undocumented or transient. It happens.

This post makes the assumption that happiness should be a permanent state rather than a transient state like any other emotion.

Shouldn't we seek to just 'be', and react accordingly to what the moment impresses upon us? If we seek to be happy at all times, wouldn't that be as much of a sickness as being sad all the time? Wouldn't happiness become something common place and fall into the background like so much white noise?

Not the parent but: I would imply exactly such a thing. Just like how, in some/most states you are supposed to pay a tipped employee minimum wage if they don't make the equivalent in tips. As far as I can tell from having worked in food service: that payout never happens.

"In patients with schizophrenia, 1054 (13.2%) had at least 1 violent offense compared with 4276 (5.3%)"

thats a 2.5 difference in patients with schizophrenia compared to the general population

> When trying to predict risk of violence knowing that someone has schizophrenia tells you almost nothing. Knowing they have substance misuse tells you a bit more.

That is simply not true though. Substance abuse changes the rate at which it happens but Substance abuse seems to have a high comorbidity with Schizophrenia and while the rate is significantly lower when there are no substance issues it is still higher. Substance abuse, per the link you provided, creates a 3rd and fourth population subset (1: schizophrenics 2: neurotypical 3:Schizophrenics with Substance abuse 4: NT with Substance abuse) Which after your response, seems like you're being intentionally misleading in order prove your point.

Doesn't your own link say that there is a ~2.6 times higher likelihood of violent offenses in schizophrenia compared to the General Population? Of course, it does say that the effect is significantly more pronounced with a 'substance abuse co-morbidity' but I can't seem to find the likelihood of a substance abuse co-morbidity with schizophrenia in this paper.

There also does not appear to be a definition for what they define as a 'substance abuse comorbidity' Looking it up: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2669586/

"Schizophrenia Patients Report Consistently Higher Rates of Substance Abuse Than the General Population, Notably With Respect to 4 Licit (Nicotine and Alcohol) and Illicit (Cannabis and Cocaine) Substances"

it also says this is not to be used as a baseline for studies but if Schizophrenia is commonly co-morbid with substance abuse then pointing out that mental illness doesn't increase violence by much seems like a red-herring.

C in m/s does fit into max int with room to spare. What I'm more concerned with is that our Universe might be running on SQL and that dark matter is actually table whitespace.

and passenger doesn't equal all car accidents.

you left out: "Motor Vehicle Crash 1 in 102"

http://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/preventable-death-ov...

Can you elaborate on this? This sounds like a Naturalistic Fallacy.

1) don't abuse your dogs

2) don't abuse your dogs

3) don't abuse your dogs

Pit bulls are not weapons. Especially, no more so than a Doberman, the old standby scary dog: German Shepherd, or a Rottweiler.

Some points:

1) Pit Bull is not a breed but an umbrella term for a number of stocky dogs used for fighting originally then used for: hunting, farming, and as 'nanny' dogs

2) They are some of the most over-bred dogs in America(along with Rottweilers) and this, as well as the popularity of them as 'manly' dogs among less privileged socioeconomic classes, contributes to the prevalence of the idea of these dogs as particularly aggressive.

https://www.thedodo.com/people-are-breeding-pit-bulls-over-a...

http://saveabullmn.org/pit-bulls-and-euthanasia-rates/

3)Breed is arguably a poor indicator of risk.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pit_bull#Dog_attack_risk

4) They have been found to be no more human aggressive than other breeds though they trend towards dog aggression.

http://www.akc.org/dog-breeds/american-staffordshire-terrier...

http://journaltimes.com/news/local/defending-the-pit-bull-ex...

https://www.aspca.org/about-us/aspca-policy-and-position-sta...

Since it appears that everyone is talking about this in the present tense even though the article is talking about the Civil Rights Movement and there are no referenced sources post-1965: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db94.htm

This one in particular(What is going on with Mexican rates of asthma?): https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/images/databriefs/51-100/db94_fig2....