sol_invictus

to be frank I'm not here to argue the semantics of a single incident, but rather to argue against the "left can do no harm" crowd

Just an example from, uh, 2 days ago:

https://www.chronicle.com/article/professor-fired-for-allege...

False comparison - you’ll find plenty of vitriol against white people, christians, traditional values and such in extreme left

OP understands neither science nor complex systems. Science is never ”ready” so by their logic nothing would ever get published, and something as integral to human ”system” as the gut microbiome being reduced to half can have dramatic nonlinear effects to health, making an alarmist approach 100% valid

Lifespan is a poor metric for quality of life. You can be alive whilst being plagued by multiple illness. Healthspan is what is important (how long you can live without suffering from a major ailment) and that is where gut microbiome plays an important role.

I can give you plenty of left-wing policies that ended in mass genocide. How do you fit that into your mental model?

The question here is - is the cost difference of a shared bathroom versus a private bathroom the (or a) major factor in not building affordable housing and the answer is almost certainly no. If it's not, then this is just elitistic moralizing from the ivory tower.

Happy to be proven wrong by the way. (non-sarcastic)

Privacy?

The original point, although not fully written out, was that the elite schooled grandfather thought it would be more effective to build housing with shared bathrooms, but he neglected the humane aspect(s) of living.

Somewhat ironically you are falling into that same model of thinking.

Because some people (as in, a vast majority of the global population) live their lives in a low-income bracket and one could consider it a very unpleasant thought to live your entire life sharing bathrooms with strangers.

It has large ears too. Which stereotype are you referring to that has large ears and noses? Brits perhaps?

Agreed - out of the blunt comments, maybe 5% are truly abrasive. I don't think it is nearly as big of a problem as the author is making it to be.

Serious question: do people want HN to turn into a safe space then? I always preferred the blunt tone of the forum, because in practical terms you can flesh things out faster that way, and anyway it's literally pixels on your computer - they can't physically hurt you. Hell I'm even guilty of fanning the flames further sometimes, but again I always thought it's part of the conversational culture here in order to gauge every possible angle to a subject as effective as possible.

I certainly don't want the "forced nice" tone being policed here. It will likely kill the entire charm of HN.

It's difficult to read sentiment and know whether you're being sarcastic or not so please take no offense from my tone, but this is the complete opposite of "beautiful" - it is the first steps in turning humans into units of production with every action being optimized for you and leaving little to no individual freedom.

It's communism 2.0 except the government doesn't only dictate production quotas but also "life quotas." It's an absolute nightmare and seeing what a spectacular failure communism 1.0 was, everyone should be more than freaking out about this.

So lets say 50% of farmers quit and become philosophizing dog-walkers, please explain how you avoid a global famine and / or how you distribute food to people and simulatenously take five minutes to think what happens to food prices when its suddenly a scarcity, and what happens to the value of your monthly universal income

Protip: we’re experiencing the same effect right now thanks to liberal money-printing for ”covid relief”

Localism should be encouraged more, I agree, but I just get the vibe these antiwork activists arent arguing for that, but rather for some subjective right to spend their days doing what pleases them while someone else provides the basic necessities for them.

I dont understand the logic in this at all. Is the idea to have some sort of free flowing money pool a la UBI that ensures all people can obtain basic necessities? If so, then what will ensure those necessities exist in the first place if the intent is to remove money as a tool of trade? You cant just make supply and demand magically disappear.

This sounds just about as superficial as the dude on fox news who wants to walk dogs and teach philosophy as their profession. Surprisingly or not, none of the antiwork activists are queuing to work in rice fields or other gritty but absolutely necessary jobs.

So what exactly is the alternative for selling your labour to someone else - and more importantly, one that is scalable to the general populace?

Everything being revenue optimized and run by MBA people

The mindset you describe is a mindset of exploration, adventure and tinkering. Occasionally it ends in catastrophe, but historically has been the driver of some of the greatest inventions. But such is the nature of nature; gains generally don’t come free.

Ergo, your obedient unquestioning good citizen mentality is far less progressive & beneficial than you think it is.

Mastering the subconscious is definitely a top trait for attention management / discipline and quality of life in general.

I noticed this pattern not too long ago: was reading a technical book, felt compelled to drop it and browse Twitter or similar. I "dug" into my head internally to find out a reason why (much like you do in meditation) - I wasn't tired or bored, the book was interesting and I didn't really want to quit it - and I simply couldn't rationalize a reason. It was purely a dopamine-driven habit which I was simply not in control of, it was automatic.

You hear a lot of talk how humans are just as programmable as anything else, and that was one of my personal come-to-Jesus moments.

By now it's fairly well known the most addictive apps & sites exploit your dopamine system to keep you hooked in:

https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2018/dopamine-smartphones...

Usual culprit - your brain's dopamine circuits are fried by your daily activities like endless phone browsing, video games etc.

Cut down on dopamine junk and you'll find motivation without any effort.

Thanks. I still find it surprising a company of Amazon's stature wouldn't have figured out how to fully automate something relatively trivial like this.

Yes, but "having a human in the system" isn't answering the original question: what does Amazon benefit from introducing excess cost into this equation? Surely there should be nothing clandestine in your own usage data, search queries etc.

Doesn't make any sense, the computation time difference between pulling data from one system and fifty systems isn't measured in the months range.

> We will provide your information to you as soon as we can. Usually, this should not take more than a month.

What benefit does Amazon get out of delaying giving out this information?

Thanks for highlighting, personally blacklisting Scientific American as a phony pseudoscience magazine. Truly a shame

Great answer, especially [0]

> (There is a possibility of massive influx of young men from Africa and Asia into Europe, which would replenish the potential, but that does not concern the USA.)

Didnt this basically happen in 2015

I increasingly worry this division will end in widespread violence in some form of civil war(s). Please change my opinion about this.

I would argue the golden parachute is better, since it leaves both parties in a state of resolution. A whistleblower law may provide legal coverage but it is not difficult to imagine the social pressure being applied afterwards to someone who "stirs up a mess"