Double your userbase with two lines of code and a box of Modafinil
alexkrupp.typepad.com
alexkrupp.typepad.com
Look up the symptons of ADHD. Go to your friendly neighborhood doctor or psychiatrist and tell him you have said symptons. Also, look around continuously, don't make eye contact, and fidget a lot. Then indicate that you've done some research and heard that off-label prescriptions of Modafanil have shown promising results for ADHD and that you're not interested in addictive stimulant medication. If the doctor tries to give you Stratera, tell him that you've heard it makes some people anxious and that you think Modafanil would be a much better fit for you.
If it doesn't work, try another doctor.
Then, enjoy a lifetime of enhanced cognition, at least as long as you've got prescription drug coverage. You will also have gained the ability to go without sleep whenever you so desire.
There are so many good things that will happen by doing the above, as well as by avoiding certain foods, that when you put it all together, you will feel great. Removing caffeine will stop the withdrawal symptoms and addiction after you're done with the initial withdrawal. Removing corn-syrup will make you feel much better and food without it tastes much cleaner. Avoiding manufactured foods will point you to baked goods, which are much, much healthier. Water is incredibly necessary and will help clean you out, as well as help flush any excess protein away from your kidneys after you eat the meat, as well as flouridate your teeth. Often when your body feels "hungry," it is actually thirsty for water.
Of course evolution might have another "idea" of what is good for us than we do (evolution doesn't really care about us).
Evolution is pretty random (or is it chaotic?). There are so many permutations that we have a DNA sequence that is very, very good for surviving in our world. It could be better though, and at this point in our civilization natural selection will not get us there.
Genetic engineering is inevitable. It will happen. In 10 or 20 or 100 years when it becomes practical there will be "conservatives" who are against it and "liberals" who are for it. They will fight for a while but in the end science will win, because science always wins in the long run.
Perhaps I am missing out big time by not using drugs. Some famous works of art are probably the result of drug use (how much of it, I don't know). I also remember a recent anecdote about a rock musician meeting Tony Blair and asking him how he manages his workload. Answer: "Certainly using different drugs than you" - of course it could just be "enthusiasm" being the drug, I don't know.
If you could become a world famous artist in exchange for living 10 years less, would you do it? Or whatever is your ambition (invent the Google killer, whatever).
I'd also like to take over Equatorial Guinea, but the current regime may fall before I get the chance.
You are forgetting the other side to evolutionary fitness: the environment. Human evolution has been progressively stagnated by the invention of adaptive technology. Being hard of hearing or nearly blind is no longer a deadly condition, hence it no longer prevents procreation, hence evolution doesn't factor anymore.
The human genetic structure is largely the same as it was hundreds if not thousands of years ago precisely because we can use tools to adapt to situations much faster than any evolutionary fitness can proof out and spread through the population.
As for the memory gene of mice, that would only have been important if a better memory made mice more successful at what they do. Evidently in the environments mice adapted to this was not the case.
"Of course evolution might have another "idea" of what is good for us than we do (evolution doesn't really care about us)."
Evolution doesn't have ideas. It does not use reason. It does not think. It exists purely as a pattern of change in species over time. There is no need to give it more credit than that, it is quite powerful enough without the addition of sentience.
A report from your friendly biomedical biologists.
Complete bullshit. Penn and Teller killed this one pretty convincingly.
Basically, if you eat a 'normal' diet (which most people don't, ironically) including enough veggies and fruits, there's no real need for outside water sources.
For most people, enough water that you don't feel thirsty is sufficient. There's no need to force yourself to drink water. And hungry very, very rarely means thirsty.
Also, you claim that people very, very rarely feel hungry when they want water.
It's easy to show you're just guessing. Have you ever eaten a solid meal without drinking fluids? Then how can you be sure that the hunger you felt was just for food, and liquids only to wash it down, instead of hunger for water as well? You can't. It could very well be correlation, and not causation, that when you eat, you want to drink water as well, which means that you were hungry for water all along.
If it's even 1% hunger for water, that proves you are wrong.
Also, there's no such thing as a normal diet.
Also, Snopes has addressed the topic: http://snopes.com/medical/myths/8glasses.asp
Believe what you'd like, but don't try to mislead other people with it.
(Have I ever eaten a solid meal without drinking fluids? fuck yes. are you kidding?)
Doesn't really make you smarter, that's pretty hyperbolic, but will definitely stave off some of that 'brain fog' that comes about after lunch / towards the end of the day. And being able to be productive an extra eight hours or so a week is pretty priceless.
A study showed that "Modafinil significantly reduced error rates in the long delay condition of the visuo-spatial task and in the manipulation conditions." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=15221200&dopt=Abstract
Maybe it doesn't make you smarter, but it makes your brain function better for some very specific memory tasks. I think that such a benefit would be broader than the number recall tasks from the study.
The smallest details can sometime have a surprisingly large impact.
It's not always clear why certain startups are successful and others fall by the wayside, maybe the success or failure of a website just depends on getting the hundreds of little details just right ?
As site developers, we need to think more about the psychological and sociological side of things, we should think of ourselves as community builders not just tool makers.
What are the two lines of code to produce this?
[(define-input feedback) (mail '("foo@bar") feedback)]Thank you for your input.
The code for the thank-you page could be as simple as:
import smtplib
smtplib.SMTP('127.0.0.1').sendmail('website@example.com', ['you@example.com'], "From: website@example.com\r\nTo: you@example.com\r\n\r\nMessage follows: %s" % (web.input.get('feedback', 'NOTHING'),))
Not sure it that will work without a .quit(), but then you'd have at least 4 lines. Well, that's what local libraries are for. :)