It does make me wonder if legalizing weed (since it is cheap and you can grow it yourself) would alleviate the opiate crisis... people may still bomb themselves out of their minds but at least they won't be supporting whatever this prison pharma complex has become. Whether we pay to support these guys on welfare, or rehab, or prison it is on the public's dime right now any way you slice it.
It isn't too surprising, eating carbs is popular because societies that could grow them outcompeted those that couldn't. If you can feed your army grain then you're going to have a bigger better army than the guys eating venison and roots since your foodstuffs are more dense in calories and keep longer. Rationing during wartime comes to mind, too. But the carbs are really just the barest energy for your body, so if you skip them you're not missing out. For the counter example you can look up rabbit starvation, but that doesn't really apply in modern times since it is easy to get some fat or fruits or veggies, but shows a situation where having carbs would be a boon. Societies are shifting from keeping anyone from starving (where carbs are king, dollar for calorie what could compare? Perhaps insects?) to optimizing for health, which will lean towards more expensive foodstuffs.
That's been my experience. I used to have my blood sugar crash on me sometimes, and it stopped once I stopped eating or drinking anything with artificial sweeteners. Full calorie yogurt instead of light stopped me wanting to snack between lunch and dinner. If I want to treat myself to a soda I just have a real one and don't worry about the calories since I only have a few a week.
You can observe changes in consciousness, personality, et al in brain damage cases. While you could conclude that the brain is merely a conduit, parsimony would make it appear that the brain is at work.
First job I had out of school was a lab where nearly everyone was "permanent contractors", where they were just using it as a way to avoid paying benefits. Interviewed another place where the lab had a 3 month opening because they had a 'permanent contractor' they really liked but couldn't keep her year round (unspoken: because then she'd have cause to sue for benefits, as I understand things). I don't know if it is still that bad but it sure led to high turnover and low morale at those places.
It makes a bigger difference if you have kids. Didn't see the appeal until going to a store became a big ordeal. People's lives were probably saved when they were infants and we were sleep deprived and could have whatever we needed delivered!
I've thought this for a while, but it seems the nuke plants keep getting shut down and not replaced... is it just that the nuke risks are relatively known and the risks from fossil fuels are less obvious?
We have a O365 Slack clone at work called Teams I'm going to try to promote to get rid of the inevitable super long email chains editing a Word document as a group... for chat mostly everyone here uses Skype, which does work well when people are at different locations, which can include being away from their desk and in a spot they can't bring a mobile phone. If people were always at their personal desk then it'd be better to just walk over, most of the time.
Range fragmentation. If a species is fine suffering disasters that don't quite effect its whole range, but you fragment it with development, now you have isolated pockets that can be wiped out that won't be recolonized as easily. If the pockets are isolated long enough, you may even induce speciation.
I've seen neuroscience articles (and I will admit I don't know how solid they are) that indicate that via MRI studies, people make decisions before they are conscious of this, and appear to post hoc build a rationale to agree with what their subconscious decided. So, you may actually have an easier time at getting the AI to spit out its parameters than a human.
It's relatively easy to compare the algorithm to untrained people and confirm it isn't any better. It is harder to make a better algorithm, because the database may not even contain all the variables that really are important to gather, nor may gathering the best ones even be possible. (e.g. if the truly best variable was "positive relationship with grandfather", this information has likely not been collected nor collated; variables that seem important may merely be correlated with actual variables, e.g. "likes fruits and vegetables" versus "stable home life with family meals" or whatever). Even experts that are better than the algorithm may not realize what factors they're unconsciously taking into account.
"Once adjusting to shape" is kind of giving away the divergence, though, isn't it? Otherwise, sure, lots of styles are gender specific per society at large. Some of it depends on where you work, too. I work in science, so our dress code is "no pajamas, nothing with holes in it (if you're meeting a client)". If you see someone in a suit you assume they are interviewing or meeting an important client.
My daughters are in love with pockets! I suppose we'll have to teach them how to sew them into dresses...it may be partially because women generally carry hand bags or purses and men do not. The expense and effort of sensibly designing the pockets may be seen as a wasted effort?
Yes... being able to pick out clothes and not even need to try them on is a boon of being a man... the first time I went dress shopping with my wife and saw what a mess a women's department is, I joked with her that if shopping for men's clothes was as difficult, we wouldn't wear any.
Women's clothing in particular seems to be ephemeral... for my wife, even 'high quality' brands seem to last less time than similar quality men's clothing. Even something like a pair of jeans: whereas the men's jeans are made with real denim, the women's are blended with a lot of other materials and wear out faster.
Slashdot Mirror
It does make me wonder if legalizing weed (since it is cheap and you can grow it yourself) would alleviate the opiate crisis... people may still bomb themselves out of their minds but at least they won't be supporting whatever this prison pharma complex has become. Whether we pay to support these guys on welfare, or rehab, or prison it is on the public's dime right now any way you slice it.
It isn't too surprising, eating carbs is popular because societies that could grow them outcompeted those that couldn't. If you can feed your army grain then you're going to have a bigger better army than the guys eating venison and roots since your foodstuffs are more dense in calories and keep longer. Rationing during wartime comes to mind, too. But the carbs are really just the barest energy for your body, so if you skip them you're not missing out. For the counter example you can look up rabbit starvation, but that doesn't really apply in modern times since it is easy to get some fat or fruits or veggies, but shows a situation where having carbs would be a boon. Societies are shifting from keeping anyone from starving (where carbs are king, dollar for calorie what could compare? Perhaps insects?) to optimizing for health, which will lean towards more expensive foodstuffs.
That's been my experience. I used to have my blood sugar crash on me sometimes, and it stopped once I stopped eating or drinking anything with artificial sweeteners. Full calorie yogurt instead of light stopped me wanting to snack between lunch and dinner. If I want to treat myself to a soda I just have a real one and don't worry about the calories since I only have a few a week.
You can observe changes in consciousness, personality, et al in brain damage cases. While you could conclude that the brain is merely a conduit, parsimony would make it appear that the brain is at work.
Streaming directly to a TV from your phone is easy with android stuff and requires an AppleTV for iPhone, for example.
I suppose you could verify if you stopped them or not by looking at the data after changing various things.
First job I had out of school was a lab where nearly everyone was "permanent contractors", where they were just using it as a way to avoid paying benefits. Interviewed another place where the lab had a 3 month opening because they had a 'permanent contractor' they really liked but couldn't keep her year round (unspoken: because then she'd have cause to sue for benefits, as I understand things). I don't know if it is still that bad but it sure led to high turnover and low morale at those places.
Its basically akin to trying to fight ticket scalping.
That's true, I suppose the more consumer friendly approach would be to have a Prime price and a non-member price.
Eh, that's like Costco or Sam's Club, though. Presumably that item was selling at invoice or just barely over.
It makes a bigger difference if you have kids. Didn't see the appeal until going to a store became a big ordeal. People's lives were probably saved when they were infants and we were sleep deprived and could have whatever we needed delivered!
I've thought this for a while, but it seems the nuke plants keep getting shut down and not replaced... is it just that the nuke risks are relatively known and the risks from fossil fuels are less obvious?
We have a O365 Slack clone at work called Teams I'm going to try to promote to get rid of the inevitable super long email chains editing a Word document as a group... for chat mostly everyone here uses Skype, which does work well when people are at different locations, which can include being away from their desk and in a spot they can't bring a mobile phone. If people were always at their personal desk then it'd be better to just walk over, most of the time.
Range fragmentation. If a species is fine suffering disasters that don't quite effect its whole range, but you fragment it with development, now you have isolated pockets that can be wiped out that won't be recolonized as easily. If the pockets are isolated long enough, you may even induce speciation.
I've not seen honey for sale, labeled as such, that wasn't honey when you look at the ingredient list. Are they lying/being fooled by suppliers?
I would imagine that it seems like we have more free will than we do, but agree that we have at least some.
I've seen neuroscience articles (and I will admit I don't know how solid they are) that indicate that via MRI studies, people make decisions before they are conscious of this, and appear to post hoc build a rationale to agree with what their subconscious decided. So, you may actually have an easier time at getting the AI to spit out its parameters than a human.
It's relatively easy to compare the algorithm to untrained people and confirm it isn't any better. It is harder to make a better algorithm, because the database may not even contain all the variables that really are important to gather, nor may gathering the best ones even be possible. (e.g. if the truly best variable was "positive relationship with grandfather", this information has likely not been collected nor collated; variables that seem important may merely be correlated with actual variables, e.g. "likes fruits and vegetables" versus "stable home life with family meals" or whatever). Even experts that are better than the algorithm may not realize what factors they're unconsciously taking into account.
"Once adjusting to shape" is kind of giving away the divergence, though, isn't it? Otherwise, sure, lots of styles are gender specific per society at large. Some of it depends on where you work, too. I work in science, so our dress code is "no pajamas, nothing with holes in it (if you're meeting a client)". If you see someone in a suit you assume they are interviewing or meeting an important client.
Not to mention that they're not generally insured properly, much like the Uber drivers.
My daughters are in love with pockets! I suppose we'll have to teach them how to sew them into dresses...it may be partially because women generally carry hand bags or purses and men do not. The expense and effort of sensibly designing the pockets may be seen as a wasted effort?
Yes... being able to pick out clothes and not even need to try them on is a boon of being a man... the first time I went dress shopping with my wife and saw what a mess a women's department is, I joked with her that if shopping for men's clothes was as difficult, we wouldn't wear any.
Mitch and Paul wrote the tax bill, I doubt Trump has ever seen a W-2 in person.
Taking random stuff and burning it is harder to keep clean than a known. That's why it is easier to burn natural gas in a clean way than coal.
Women's clothing in particular seems to be ephemeral... for my wife, even 'high quality' brands seem to last less time than similar quality men's clothing. Even something like a pair of jeans: whereas the men's jeans are made with real denim, the women's are blended with a lot of other materials and wear out faster.