> if it doesn't hurt then you're not making optimal development
this is almost certainly wrong - 100% balls to wall training will surely be suboptimal (on avg) to achieving most fitness goals - eg within a running training block there will generally be recovery and "general aerobic" runs which are easy in effort relative to the harder work in the block. These easy efforts are necessary to optimally achieve the desired physiological adaptations acquired through increased volume and "nailing" the hard workouts. The easier runs enable this by getting volume at lower risk of injury + conserving energy/will for the key workouts.
This also doesn't consider how important recovery is to optimal results (as in sleep, rest, self-care etc).
on first glance it seems like an interesting take, but then you realize (as someone else already pointed out) that the fastest thing in the universe is not fast, and therefore nothing is fast? a little more thought should make you realize this is a poorly formed take. Also, worth repeating, please read the article before posting. It may be that your insight or critique is present and discussed in the article already.
I also hate Tableau for this reason. However, it's a bad pattern to be storing custom SQL in a BI tool IMO. Better to create tables or views which hold your report logic and are stored in git. That way you're decoupling defining metrics and business logic from your BI tool, making that information queryable in your warehouse by users or other tools (and easily viewable!).
Possibly - but I could just claim that for me déja vu is exactly when two experiences are not differentiable from one another. And if someone claims to have experienced this moment before, identically, how would I refute their claim. It's their experience after all.
How does déja vu, that is the re-experiencing an experience, fit into this theory? It appears that the Information axioms fails to be Essential when one considers déja vu.
Who are the trained professionals prescribing and dosing out smartphones and social media? Like, I get your analogy, but they are so dissimilar in practice that it just ends up reading naive.
I commented this elsewhere, but it's worth repeating because actually reading the author's arguments (granted, in other writings, not OP) will allow you to see he's considered this point and is will to accept that causation works the other way around.
It's a fair point. But what explains the uptick in depression and mental health issues starting around 2012, disproportionately impacting pre-teen girls and not contained to any geo. The author's entire point is that social media is the only explanation that that has been proposed [1]. Moreover, it's not a far-fetched explanation. He very aware that correlation does not provide causation, and that it could be the other way around. However, no one (according to him) has offered up a theory which explains the data like the social media theory does.
It's a fair point. But what explains the uptick in depression and mental health issues starting around 2012, disproportionately impacting pre-teen girls and not contained to any geo. The author's entire point is that social media is the only explanation that that has been proposed. Moreover, it's not a far-fetched explanation. He very aware that correlation does not provide causation, and that it could be the other way around. However, no one (according to him) has offered up a theory which explains the data like the social media theory does.
The author, Jonathan Haidt, has considered the global financial crisis but doesn't believe it explains the data [1], he writes
"It’s not because of the Global Financial Crisis. Why would that hit younger teen girls hardest? Why would teen mental illness rise throughout the 2010s as the American economy got better and better? Why did a measure of loneliness at school go up around the world only after 2012, as the global economy got better and better? (See Twenge et al. 2021). And why would the epidemic hit Canadian girls just as hard when Canada didn’t have much of a crisis?"
He is admittedly open to other ideas, but claims that no one to date has been able to provide a explanation for the upticks depression and mental health issues which disproportionately impacts young, pre-teen girls and is seen across many developed countries.
I do like this type of reminder, it's a good and clearly communicated message. It's interesting to me because at some level what the author is communicating is metrics 101 - when comparing performance across products/features/content/etc, normalize the timeline to time since launch. This is a simple principle and one that I apply often to work specific settings, but can easily forget to apply in social settings like the author describes. There's a lot of value to applying a semantic layer to your life, which is obvious but challenging due to influence of emotions and the lack of clear goals.
Agreed. It also reminded me of the book Illness as Metaphor by Susan Sontag. In the essay she talks about the social perception and behaviors around illness and how those create real barriers to overcoming and curing disease. Specifically, the she writes about how consumption was at one time fashionable due to the gaunt physique and blasé attitude TB would often cause.
Frankenstein is such a great story, jam packed with philosophical inquiry. Not having read the book since HS, this[1] episode of In Our Time was both nostalgic and interesting.
Love the style already. Here's a footnote from Chapter 1, and a reason while I'll continue to (very leisurely) read this book.
> When I was an undergraduate, I attributed recursion to “elves” instead of the Recursion Fairy,
referring to the Brothers Grimm story about an old shoemaker who leaves his work unfinished
when he goes to bed, only to discover upon waking that elves (“Wichtelmänner”) have finished
everything overnight. Someone more entheogenically experienced than I might recognize these
Rekursionswichtelmänner as Terence McKenna’s “self-transforming machine elves”.
Fair point, but this isn't a cheap bike, so maybe at least make the option available?
I also am not certain on the exact reasons why internal gear hubs and belt drives are more expensive. I imagine manufacturing those hubs are more costly just by the nature of their design. It also used to be the case that you needed a specific frame built for a belt drive to run one, but they make breakable belts now so that's no longer a huge restriction.
I have heard in Europe where bike commuting is far more common in the US where I'm living that belt drive and internal gearing are more common, but this was hearsay.
Beautiful bike, but very disappointed to see a standard drivetrain. For a commuter I'm only interested in one with a belt drive and internal gearing. I'm not sure why these drivetrains are not becoming more common, especially for commuters.
If you are looking for more of magical realism Murakami has become known for, I highly recommend Hard-Boiled Wonderland, The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle. But really anything 1Q84 and earlier is good IMO.
I'm skeptical of this person's ability to "know" what they don't want to read. E.g., they are recommended Shoe Dog and a King novel, which they claim they don't want to read. However, if other people have read similar books and rated them similarly to this person and have read Shoe Dog and that King novel and rated those well, then this person may like those books. It seems they are assuming they won't like them, but not for particularly strong reasons. One of my favorite authors is Haruki Murakami and I would have rated Colorless Tsukuru a 2 or 3. If that were the only Murakami novel I had read and I made the same assumptions this person made, I would have missed out on some of my favorite books.
The inability to simply import jupyter notebooks as python files has always been a point of friction for me, I’m glad to see this is a main feature for Pluto.
I actually don’t know if 8% is a good or bad conversion rate for free trial to month 1 paid subscriber for streaming services, or even just subscription services. In online marketing world, yes 8% is terrific, since just CTRs stand around 1%. So, just curious what baseline you’re referencing to conclude 8% is good.
Edit - some cursory googling suggests free trial to paid conversion for subscription services are generally somewhere in the 10-25% range. So I don’t think 8% is good, maybe mediocre. Note this is distinguished from lower rates associated with freemium model products(e.g., spotify). Will try to dig up some better refs to link out to.
I'm ignorant to CC companies' financials. But I would have thought their revenues are driven by transaction fees, which end up ultimately getting passed down to the buyer through higher prices. Would be interested to learn more though about CC economics. It would indeed be sad if CC rewards operated like a regressive tax, as you say.
Unsure of the exact metric you're referring to, and I'm about to be just as informal, but sports teams swing much more wildly and often than universities. In the NBA, most recently GSW, going from 5 straight finals with 3 wins to last in western conference. See also CHI before and after MJ era. LAL most recently after Kobe's retirement and pre-Lebron. In the NFL, SF post-Young pre-Harbaugh. I agree, there are often dynasties and teams can sit in the tops ranks for quite a while, however it is not at all uncommon to see once top ranked teams vying for lottery draft picks. Maybe the over-all mix does not churn that much, but I can't recall the last time a top 10 school dropped out of the top 100 without a scandal involved.
I think I get your point and I‘m open to ideas which drive home your point in a more precise way. However, the main difference between concerning ourselves with whether or not mathematical objects exists vs music or start-up ideas is their place in building a foundation for understanding reality. Science has been a productive program for understanding reality. It happens to be underpinned by math. And as a result, we have encountered some pretty interesting relationships between what the math tells us and what we observe. For instance, neutrinos and black holes were known to exist mathematically before they were ever observed and measured “in reality”. It’s not clear to me that music and start-up ideas hold up to math when it comes to being a tool for understanding or describing our reality, or perception the rig. Math is somehow fundamental to many successful enterprises which seek to describe and explain reality. Therefore, it becomes the point of focus of much philosophical inquiry when seeking to understand reality. Hence the foundational question, do mathematical objects exist? And not, does music or blockchain kittens exist?