edjrage

Dammit, sorry.

You literally linked to the same article as the parent comment.

Can't they use the data from people they test to further improve the model?

"Would you care more if I was a [polar bear]?"

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-uVr0ODIKv_s/VMGAo_qUiQI/AAAAAAAAA...

Well, it depends on what you mean by suffering (and some say suffering isn't the right translation for what they really mean). For buddhists, pain, sadness and grief are not suffering, they are indeed an inescapable part of life and are to be fully embraced with awareness and compassion. Suffering is an unnecessary, clingy, ego-centric (hyphenated to emphasize the buddhist concept) reaction to them.

Exactly. They say the Buddha was a very pragmatic man and the whole purpose of his practice was to find a way out of Samsara, the cycle of existence and suffering.

I always wonder if he would have advocated for suicide if only he didn't believe in rebirth.

Also created by the same person as SQLite. The repo itself is a SQLite database. It's an alternative to git, not just to GitHub:

https://www.fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/fossil-v-git.w...

Am I missing something or didn't you actually intend to link to P!nk - White Rabbit (Full Studio Version)?

Your comments show several common misconceptions/mischaracterizations about the topic.

Whether someone is an addict or not is not about the addict's (or anyone's) opinion. Addiction and dependency are very well understood from a scientific viewpoint.

It's not only “some” people that don't overdo it. A very large percentage of the population has used marijuana and yet you don't see most people in the conditions you described.

I highly doubt the root problem of your 60% of extended family is drugs (assuming we're just talking about stuff like marijuana or psychedelics). If they feel like they need to relax all the time, maybe it's because they're subject to too much stress or are (maybe hereditarily) oversensitive to stressors, in which case they might need some help regardless of drug use.

One last thing (but the most important), psychedelics are decidedly NOT addictive (again, following scientific definitions). In addition to not causing an urge and immediately causing tolerance that lasts for weeks, they're very well-known for ending decades-long addictions and all sorts of negative behaviors (including overuse of marijuana!). At high enough doses, they are nothing like a typical marijuana high. You really have to experience it to understand just how deeply and positively they can change one's life. Ironically enough, they might be a great option for your family to try (under proper guidance) in order to get out of their situation.

> rather than focus on goals, focus on systems

Maybe it's from James Clear?

> You do not rise to the level of your goals. You fall to the level of your systems.

> This is a quote from my new book Atomic Habits and was adapted from one of my favorite sayings by the Greek poet Archilochus: “We don't rise to the level of our expectations, we fall to the level of our training.”

https://twitter.com/jamesclear/status/1047643455722283009

This isn't Reddit, would you all please

Unless you don't like your dog, this ironically just sounds like an excuse for caring about no one but yourself.

Ok, potentially stupid question, but isn't "life" just such a "pathway"? Meaning an organism already assumes a complex system of chemical reactions, and then some other chain to produce phosphine? So is it really hard to believe that if "our understanding of rocky planets" already assumes something as complex as life is possible, then something less complex than life (but still possibly quite complex) which produces phosphine is also possible?

> If you wanted to replace all the meat and dairy with equivalent protein substitutes you’d be looking at huge amounts of land for growing soybeans, peanuts, tree nuts

In addition to the other replies, I'd like to point out that insect farming is an often overlooked solution. But of course it's just not sexy enough for most westerners.

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations:

> Edible insects contain high quality protein, vitamins and amino acids for humans. Insects have a high food conversion rate, e.g. crickets need six times less feed than cattle, four times less than sheep, and twice less than pigs and broiler chickens to produce the same amount of protein. Besides, they emit less greenhouse gases and ammonia than conventional livestock. Insects can be grown on organic waste. Therefore, insects are a potential source for conventional production (mini-livestock) of protein, either for direct human consumption, or indirectly in recomposed foods (with extracted protein from insects); and as a protein source into feedstock mixtures.

http://www.fao.org/edible-insects/en/

I'm not terribly educated either, but if you don't mind a minor possible correction, I suppose GP would have meant x = 0, which is the only point where the function would be typically undefined, and the closer x gets to 0, the more f(x) approaches infinity. Conversely, the more x approaches infinity, the more f(x) approaches 0. Also, because of the way these things are usually defined, it doesn't make sense to say x = infinity, it only makes sense to say x approaches infinity (but it might make sense in nonstandard calculus, where infinitesimals are defined - here my ignorance already shows).

I really appreciate your comments! If you're interested in hypothesizing about physics, I think it would do you a lot of good to learn at least a bit of math to go with it.

The second paragraph of the article answers your question. Recommended extensions go through a stricter review and, if approved, are then "prominently recommended on AMO and other Mozilla channels". Mozilla has been doing this curation "for free" and at their own discretion; now they're adding a paid "shortcut" for anyone whose extensions are under their radar.

Seriously, it sickens me that with all the crap that's been going on the #1 worry for many people still seems to be productivity...

What does this offer over https://hn.algolia.com?

(Algolia was backed by YC btw)

You greatly overestimate how many countries check all these boxes, or the relevance they have compared to the biggest actors.

I think the person you're replying to got the joke, and responded to the implied claim that the sequels were bad.

Maybe the most obvious one - IQ? Even if you don't think it measures intelligence, it's highly predictive of success in areas such as this.

I get the no improvement part, but why make it worse by removing stable, useful features? How much maintenance does it need? What are they gaining from this?

And maybe someone could talk about native alternatives!

Could you stop with the "adult conversation" bullshit? This patronizing tone is not fit for Hacker News. Also it ironically makes you sound like a child who wants to show off how "adult-like" they are.

That's awesome! Someone should post this on HN.

It really irks me that these things are called "laws". A law is something we expect to hold true forever, by means of the hypothetico-deductive scientific method.

They're phenomena. They're patterns we observe, and that's it. The pattern may change anytime, and that's something that should be expected. The causes may be known or unknown, but to call it a law may even make it hold true for longer, for "psychological" reasons. The law of gravity isn't influenced by what SpaceX investors think about it.

Come on, that's the opposite of my “vibe”. The commenter you refer to didn't believe there was any value in the existence of such a product, while I see so much value in this that it's puzzling to me how we still don't have an open source alternative. I didn't say it's trivial, but I bet it's simpler than that for the likes of Notion (and we do have alternatives to those).

Honestly, it's not that hard to implement something like Roam compared to the aforementioned competitors. The value is in the idea, and even that isn't novel. It really is a mystery to me why an open source alternative doesn't exist / isn't more popular.

> if you design a car with faulty brakes, you don't invent a brand new car. You fix the brakes.

Funny, this immediately came to mind:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/car-manufacturers/volks...

> “The Kombi was designed 60 years ago so it would not be possible now to put an airbag and ABS into the car. That’s why we now have to stop production,” said Jochen Funk, director of sales for VW Brazil.

So yeah, maybe we've been driving a (now 70)-year old Kombi and trying to convince ourselves one day we'll be able to just bolt ABS brakes on it.