mtsr

Sure, but there are insulation solutions that mostly prevent it. For example insulation foam layered between vapor permeable foil on the cold side and vapor inhibiting foil on the warm side.

But drywall (and other porous surfaces) are supposed to help regulate moisture, so if they never get an opportunity to dry because it's permanently cold and humid, yeah, that'll be a problem. Cracking a window at least 30 minutes per day (ideally on dry days) does wonders, though it won't help temperatures in winter.

If you're able to invest in better windows (good double or even triple glazing), that will solve it. But just wiping down the window sill semi-regularly works well, even if it's an annoying chore.

Just thinking out loud, I'd guess people living there would be an important factor since we produce quite a lot of water vapor, as do things like cooking etc. And when the house is cold, this has a tendency to condense on any surfaces. And humid porous surfaces (drywall) and even insulation will probably be a good substrate for mold.

I totally agree, but I do what I can. And while setup takes me some extra effort, I can now run my 24/7 workloads on a small box and run the big box only when needed.

But while there’s zero chance I’d willingly watch an ad without good reason, I might actually enjoy that promoted content because it just so happens to be of interest to me. That’s the difference between the two for me.

It’s such an odd choice too. HDR shows nicely on HDR displays or when combined with a well-chosen exposure level (such that the relevant parts of the shot are visible) on an SDR display.

Instead, it sometimes seems like the dynamic range is compressed to just fit mostly everything on an SDR display? Do directors not pay attention to dynamic range anymore and then just “fix” it this way in post? Surely the old timers at least would still how know to do it.

I’d probably call it promoted content, but yes, that seems a likely explanation.

And quite possible the ads-driven version, but I’ve never looked at that.

Thinking of my kids' future has also made me much more energy-conscious. Meaning I've stopped running my VM host 24/7 like I was, because neither ESX nor Proxmox is really set up for saving energy easily (automated suspending and waking, etc). Which is a shame, since I'm actually finding that with gigabit fiber at home, even on mobile connections I can work pretty decently on homelab VMs.

Running something like it on a laptop directly makes sense, but I worry about bringing some workloads back to my laptop that I really prefer to keep off it. In terms of raw performance my laptop isn't even close, especially with heavy graphic workloads. And then there's heat, etc.

It's either changing 3 lanes to the right or 1 to the left. In case of loss of control, in this case with the car coming to a stop very quickly, it might be better heading for the left lane, instead of getting stuck in the middle or second lane from the right.

They didn't actually stop their car, though. And it really looks like they could have, had they braked a little bit harder. But that may be due to the unexpected nature of the Tesla coming to a full stop.

The whole scenario would look very similar if the Tesla was a car suffering from a breakdown and moving to the safest lane it can reach safely. In such a case we would also expect other drivers to pay enough attention to prevent an accident like this...

What I don't get is why these unions need to be limited to a single shop/warehouse/whatever. Why not have a statewide/country-wide union instead? That's how you force a company to talk to you, by ensuring they cannot go around you.

I thought the US used to have profession-based unions, such as the teamsters union, who can have members all over the US?

You're potentially setting the bar very high, though. Sure, experienced programmers can command very high rates. But even mediocre programmers can make a good living.

The same could very well hold for a coffee plantation. I've seen something like it with an orange/nispero/avocado orchard. Yes, it's easy to make mistakes and it's not easy to get rich. But break-even is quite possibly not that hard to achieve.

As another poster mentioned, these things are very regional. In the orange orchard case, there happens to be a cooperative in almost every larger village in the whole region. You can easily source everything you need there and you can sell your produce wholesale. Both at fair rates, since the neighbors also go there and they pay/get the same. And there's plenty of neighbors who will be willing to help out (although you might also find those who want you to fail to buy your land). And for the day-to-day you can make use of the experience of day labourers that you can pretty much always find in these areas.

If only things were generally so simple. While I'm all for more possible causes that are more easily treated, I’d hardly call this convincing evidence that all we need to treat is zinc deficiencies. But time will tell, as I hope these kinds of research continue.

There might be a relation, phasic vs tonic dopamine. But given the anecdotal nature of the ADHD-creativeness link, I’m not so sure. Would need to see some papers about if first.

Anyway, ADHD is comorbid with plenty of other disorders that are limiting on creativity such as anxiety, low self esteem, inhibited decision making, that it’s definitely not a given.

> sourceless claims

Excuse me? There's roughly 60 years of research into the effectiveness of stimulants as a treatment for ADHD. It is probably the single best researched psychiatric drug.

While it's always useful to discuss a proven treatments relevance in the light of newly discovered alternatives, there really is no (significant) doubt in the scientific community about the effectiveness of stimulants. Given the body of evidence, I would say it's more fair to ask you to add some citations to your comments.

> These are literally two identical substances

Yes, they are. That doesn't mean that in patients with a dopamine dysregulation they don't have great therapeutic effect. One could call the euphoria nothing but an unfortunate side-effect leading to abuse in the general population.

> numbers of amphetamine addicts

So, there are addicts. That has nothing to do with therapeutic use.

> Yes, they should be cautions in my opinion.

Since they aren't prescribed to self-diagnosed ADHD patients, there should always be a doctor involved. And I can tell you the titration and monitoring is taken quite seriously, at least where I'm from.

> Using crutches can make physical rehabilitation impossible.

If you're missing a leg, that rehabilitation is going to take a long long time. As will be the case with ADHD. You might learn to cope better, but your symptoms aren’t going anywhere. ADHD isn’t something that generally gets better with age, although better coping skills may mean some people don’t experience as much of an impact on life.

And yes, stimulants are a crutch, but they do help people function better despite their disability.

That is an interesting paper, as is the co-morbidity of ADHD with epilepsy that they cite. It's also hopeful for some people suffering from ADHD because it is suggestive of the possibility of a more complete treatment for some.

However there's a general understanding of ADHD (and related disorders such as ASD) as a spectrum of conditions with multiple contributing factors. Depending on the person ADHD will manifest with more or less hyperactivity, distractability, working memory issues, and lacking emotional regulation (among other things). Different causes combine to give a somewhat amorphous disorder with a range of common symptoms.

So adding a new treatment with fewer downsides (because stimulants can have a few) is great, especially as it might treat aspects of the disorder that aren't treated by stimulants. But this doesn't mean stimulants won't still be relevant in the future.

There's there's also plenty of research showing specific dopamine receptor dysregulations as contributing to ADHD. See for example https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364120700_Dopamine_...

So unless the research also shows that this is caused by pyridoxine metabolism problems, these hypotheses can both hold at the same time.

Picking some paper that talks about different causes doesn't mean other causes aren't still relevant. It will probably be decades before we can definitively rule out contributing factors.

PS It's generalizations like yours that are very stigmatizing towards stimulant use. We already know many people benefit from them enormously and significant numbers are not getting or taking them due to stigma.

Saying somebody is creative because of their ADHD is like saying a person is charming because of their glasses. These things do not need to be related, they are charming and they happen to wear glasses. They are creative and happen to have ADHD.

Do not ascribe talents people have to their disabilities.

Besides, it's just a stereotype and doesn't hold for everyone with ADHD.

Excuse me. Who are you to judge whether somebody else who’s seeing a therapist and getting prescriptions meds does or doesn’t have ADHD? Sure the tests used aren’t black and white, but the measuring stick of specific symptoms combined with “significant problems in at least three areas of life” does a reasonable job of selecting for actual patients. And we don’t prescribe meds to the self-diagnosed.

One thing you are right about is that, like many psychological conditions, ADHD is a matter of degrees. Everyone can potentially be anxious at times, or sad, or distracted. But if it gets to a point where it impairs functioning in so many things, it might actually be a somatic issue.

I think it’s a decrease of receptors or an increase of re-uptake. But yes, there have been results pointing in that direction, but as far as I’m aware this is not as clear as that. Who does it affect? Is it seen with abusers or with users of (generally much lower dosed) meds? How much? How does this compare to the dopamine deficiency we see without treatment? Etc. But if you have a good and recent source, I’d love to read it.

Absolutely. And that’s something that any good doctor will discuss and monitor. And generally medication is combined with other treatments like CBT to learn to cope better, because medication doesn’t magically fix people.

But stimulant meds still don’t deserve any more stigma than glasses. For those who take it as part of treatment of a lifelong disability.

Edited to add: Btw, try playing squash or go swimming with kids. Suddenly your glasses aren’t the perfect solution that they may otherwise seem to be and they become yet another tool, like having the kids wearing bright swimming clothes so you can spot them in a crowd.

But you’re right, we’d love for ADHD meds to be as effective and universal as glasses, but they’re not. Probably because ADHD isn’t a single condition, but a spectrum of conditions with some overlap. So expecting a single treatment to take away all symptoms is a fantasy.

The graveyards filled with former hobbies that many with ADHD can attest to tell a different story. One where perseverance through frustration is not only relevant to one’s career, but possibly also one’s happiness.

Sure, acceptance of the limited arc of concentration and limited frustration tolerance is essential. But that doesn’t preclude people being happier when they become able to actually stick to things for a while when they want to.

Sure, I agree with them, but I also know there are a lot of mixed feelings around stimulant medication due to the attached stigma. And it bears repeating that using ones prescribed medication is not a moral failing. Especially in people who have stopped using it before and for those who might still be on the fence.

But I've changed my phrasing, just to be clear.

Do you wear glasses? Would you say you have a dependency on them? I know my wife does. So what?

Again with the stigma.

There’s little medical reason to expect stimulant effectiveness to change after the first couple of weeks, the “honeymoon period”, during which the mood lifting effects are most pronounced. It’s also that same effect that is the main attraction for abusers because it can give euphoria in high enough doses. And yes, that mostly goes away.

But other than a possible slight increase in dopamine re-uptake due to a long term increase in dopamine (over what’s initially a dopamine deficiency as far as we know), there’s no long term habituation (as far as we know).

If you feel better without medication, that’s fine, but please don’t guilt others into throwing away their metaphorical glasses.

It’s not on you. An enormous amount of stigma surrounds the use of stimulant medication, even if it’s one of the oldest and most studied psychiatric meds there is. And the stigma is continuously reinforced by all the people who don’t need it abusing the meds.

Sure, there’s also some risk for patients using them properly, but for them it does not compare to the sheer benefits provided by the meds.

Is it any surprise people get apprehensive about stopping medication? We don’t ask people to not use prescription glasses or leave their wheelchair at home and expect them to be happy about it, do we?

No need to feel so bad (edited from: be so negative) about meds. They’re a crutch, sure, or maybe a wheelchair. But you wouldn’t begrudge a disabled person their wheelchair, would you?

Or if you dislike thinking of it as a disability (even if there’s nothing morally wrong with being disabled): a pair of glasses.

Do we really think less of people (or in this case likely ourselves) for using a wheelchair or wearing glasses?

To do this legally, one can have a separate legal entity to hold on to third party assets. In the Netherlands this can be done using a foundation (stichting derdengelden).

Any transactions of third party assets go through this entity and don’t touch the company at all. And this entity doesn’t take on any risk, whatsoever.

Fees etc, of course, happen separately and are paid to the company.

So in closing: this has nothing to do with fairness and everything with the exchanges (whether purposefully or through negligence) not working this way.

As I understand it, due to lens setup this shouldn’t actually be the case. Iirc the view for say a Valve Index ends up at something like 60cm.

Here’s some actual problems that are harder:

* while your eyes remain accommodated to focus on that distance, it no longer corresponds with the way they track objects close or far away, by pointing closer together etc

* lack of correspondence between movement on screen and in the real world (usually translation, rather than rotation which tracks head position) for non-roomscale content (i.e. games where you move around larger scenes) causes motion sickness.

I think it’s important to consider whether this happens with all companies, or whether venture capital seeking to maximize returns to the detriment of both the business and the user is a factor here.