Kodix

You are correct about the utility calculation, of course.

It's just that many people can afford to have hobbies, and hobbies do not have to earn money or be a good investment in order to be worth doing.

> I find the breath work to be more useful than meditation. Now any time I find stress I immediately recognize my breath and start controlling it, almost sub-consciously.

I'd just like to note that you're literally describing mindfulness meditation and its effects, there. That's what interoceptive meditation is all about - focusing on your internal state - and breath is an excellent medium for that focus.

Anyone that believes that Wim Hof breathing is woo should literally just spend the three minutes to do a round of it and see the effects by themselves. It is immediately obvious that there is a clear effect on the body from just breathing the right way.

For anyone wanting to try, here is the video I used when I started getting into it: https://youtu.be/lwlEJ2O-6HM

(Don't necessarily pay too much attention to that creator's other videos, he's not very science-based overall.)

Just do the first round and you'll see an undeniable effect on your body and mind. I mean undeniable, not something subtle and small.

Now, the effectiveness of it all can be debated. I'm rather doubtful of some of the claims made of it, and it's very clear that a lot of non-skeptical people flock to this sort of thing, so that's expected. But there's something to it, for sure. Try it the next time you're about to do something high-stress, such as public speaking. The difference for me is night and day.

I also recommend people check out NSDR. Here is what I use: https://youtu.be/AKGrmY8OSHM

It's a bit subtler, but there's a definite effect. Supposedly it has similar effects on learning as sleep. Whether that's true or not, it's a tool you can try out yourself and decide whether or not it's helpful to you.

These sort of controllers have already been repeatedly attempted for use in gaming for the past decade or more. While working examples do exist and are sold commercially, they just aren't practical, so they haven't caught on.

So I wouldn't have high hopes for this yet, because clearly the technology just isn't there yet to enable high-fidelity brain noninvasive brain interfaces. But it'll never get there without attempts and funding, so it's good to see DARPA work on this.

Personally I'm more excited for commercial applications of things like the synchron implant (https://synchron.com), but those are pretty damn far from viable as well. And also I'm biased because I want to control everything with my brain at all times.

ZLib was always just an interface for Library Genesis, which remains hale and hearty here: https://libgen.is

It seems like ZLib was seized mainly because they started running donation drives and potentially earning money on piracy, although that's just conjecture. Libgen does not do any such thing.

I'm not sure I understand - is TAOUP bad because it stole information, or because the information it has is wrong?

Because I'd consider the latter to be far worse than the former.

Here is a recent article suggesting that that's at least somewhat true:

https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/4/18124718/google-search-re...

> 1) Individuals start expecting positive reinforcement for everything they do. Doing it for the external reward instead of finding the intrinsic reward for doing the right thing on their own. This is probably extensively researched already, although i don't have sources handy right now.

I've read a book some time ago that mentioned something to this effect - motivating people with external rewards greatly lowers or straight out erases the intrinsic rewards from those tasks. To the point where people stop enjoying tasks they used to if you pay them for it.

This was based on a scientific study, if I recall - so well done on spotting this effect on your own.

I believe the book I got this from is "Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us" by Daniel H. Pink.

>2. No hitting that damages them.

To the best of my knowledge, all violence hurts children, even if it doesn't damage them physically. There's a wide variety of studies I've seen over the years that suggest negative outcomes for kids due to corporal punishment.

Here's one such meta analysis from a quick search, but there's plenty more out there: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3768154/

Agreed with the remainder of your points. Though what's actually is difficult is the execution of all that, in my opinion.

Sounds like it's a machine learning based way to make it easier to design the guide RNA for the CRISPR protein used in gene editing, making it easier to target it the way you want to.

But that's basically all I know. It really would be nice to have someone actually knowledgeable describe this better.

I agree that it is a feature. If shutdowns are a thing, I'd rather have this feature than not.

I emphasized that they call it a feature because they've hidden it and refused to admit it until decent proof appeared. Which is just shady.

Don't forget that this (in their words) "feature" was only announced after it was found by users, not before.

And it's now somehow the users' fault for jumping to conclusions.

The largest benefit of Pomodoro for me is just starting things instead of procrastinating. It's a very "light" thought that I'll just spend a pomodoro on something, making it easy to get started. And once you get started, it almost always gets far easier to continue than to stop.

Good lord, the author is having way too much fun with this article.

>Smell them and weep

>herring-tasters of erring

>the Dutch were shocked when accusations surfaced in November that there was something rotten about the national herring test

>Mr Vollaard’s study has blown the lid off the sealed world of Dutch herring.

>Fishmongers [...] now say the test is rotten.

>The judge and Atlantic say they have been smeared, and that the statistical evidence is a red herring.

>But the charges [...] have left the test’s reputation for impartiality gutted.

My alteration specifically or the idea generally?

The only reason I suggested a tax break is because it would work as a good motivator for people to actually engage themselves a bit. They're paying the money anyway, why not do something with it?

The idea generally... in an ideal world where you simply could not fund campaigns from money except from public donations like this, it'd just even the odds a little bit for non-billionaires.

I don't know of a way to make the existing money and power of billionaires not matter in politics at all, though. There's always loopholes and workarounds.

Sure. But where is this campaign located, exactly?

And how come dead people are signing up for it in droves, as has been discovered in the past?

And how come people who didn't sign up for it find "their" comments sent, too?

I'm all for avoiding bias, but we know enough about this campaign by now to say with certainty it's shady.

Better yet, make it a tax break. You can choose where $100 of your tax goes by writing in the organizations.

This is a thing in Poland for donating to nonprofits, except it's 1% of your tax. It seems to work alright.

It's the obvious next step, but the issue there is that the current US government is likewise profit driven.

Net Neutrality wouldn't have been an issue again in the first place, otherwise.

That's been my impression as well. It seems like the same thing you see a lot of heavier people say ("oh, it doesn't work for me") except with more complex language ("oh, it's much more complicated than that. We understand nothing about this, this rough model is completely unhelpful!").

I really wouldn't have expected that sort of reaction on this forum ahead of time. It's a bit disappointing.

Here is a proposed mechanism: count calories as they are on the label, see if you lose weight. If you do not, lower them further, still counting by the label.

It doesn't matter if they are exact for a given person so long as the labels are consistent. They are sufficiently consistent.

I'm curious - have you tried losing weight, and is this from personal experience? Because I found it trivial by just counting calories and keeping a watch on my weight. I don't doubt that sometimes the calories I absorbed were less or more than what I wrote down, but that doesn't really matter in the long run - they're sufficiently accurate.

You're really making it sound more complex and difficult than it is.

Oh, sure, it's difficult to say with certainty that 100 calories on the label will be exactly 100 calories for every person ever - but there's really not a gigantic amount of variance. Certainly it's a good enough guideline for use.

It's a matter of thermodynamics more than anything else. You can't get energy from nothing. Quantifying the exact amount of energy you'll get from a food is difficult to do precisely, but the guidelines we have are good enough for use for the vast majority of people. You can be pedantic about it, but that won't change the fact that it is that simple to lose weight, as proven time and again.

That's true about Imgur. It has already gained a sizable community not directly related to reddit before this fiasco, I wouldn't be surprised if it grew more quickly now. It has the infrastructure as well as the most popular form of content from reddit - unlike something like voat.

If I recall correctly (it's down right now, not a big surprise) about half of the users are subscribers to voat's fatpeoplehate.

Those excellent people are the grassroots of the community you'd be joining.

Well, that's a perfectly reasonable conclusion to make, in this case. However, his business just seems to be the wrong one to use this model on. For one, there is no added value for paying customers from the free customers being there. For another thing, the rewards for buying into his product just seem.. meager. I know that I wouldn't want to buy any of them.

Though, his comments about the psychology of free users? Spot on, in my opinion.