Even for this, I still need outside perspective, especially when I (currently) fail at it badly. Do I fail to increase my barbell by 1 kg because I haven't tried enough, or because it's what only 0.001% people managed to do and I'm likely not one of them? I guess this may make me solve one or two unsolved math problem that I don't know is unsolved, but I don't want to count on it.
I've gone from amateur punter to moderately competent athlete (think d3 college team, though my sport has no such metric), and my thought is this:
The only way to get better if you've plateaued is to change something. The external reasons you fail matter only because they tell you what to change internally. I've done things that surely not more than 100 people have done, and I'm not, by any metric, in the top .000001% or whatever. I just decided to do them and fought hard, it really was that simple.
This also relates to my interp of the article. There's grinding/training and then there's "having that dog in ya". He's trying to remind people to do the latter.
And this is why I'm irritated whenever a comment just thoughtlessly answer "Just raise your offer bro". There might be some transaction barriers that make paying a service no longer worth it, one of them is the amount of fraud like you mentioned, another is societal problem that reduces people's competency as a whole so competent people becomes too few to search.
Yeah it feels like the diagnosis itself is useless, compared to just straight up trying some of those drugs and see how much you feel better. If none works, then no use in diagnosis.
Right? If the meds work, they work, I just want someone to control the side effects and help with sourcing and dosage. If they don't, I can't get disability or whatever work/military/wife-slavery exemption with that paper anyway.
Yeah the comic seems to imply that tariffs are always always bad. Which maybe what's in mind for free trade absolutists, but is certainly not my opinion. Current administration may wield it very horribly, but it's still a useful tool.
Another analogy that's in my mind is cancer. You certainly don't want to provide more nutrition for those literally parasitic cells.
Now I'm curious, do people actually tried to hack vacuum tubes or other big servers that's barely 1MB RAM? It seems like another thing that needs big investment to work properly, unlike those other techs where results can be shown even with little materials.
Yeah, there are retrocomputing hobbyists who mess around with sometimes-physically-large computers that were important many decades ago. I don't know if anyone is hacking on vacuum tubes of the kind that you could in principle build a computer with - there's a reason they became obsolete for digital computation almost as soon as the transistor was invented. On the other hand, I personally think it would be neat to try to build a CRT in a garage, which is of course a type of vacuum tube. I don't think this would be an easy garage project, but it does seem like might be tractable for someone who understand physical manufacturing and electronics well, has access to glassblowing equipment, etc.
> Now I'm curious, do people actually tried to hack vacuum tubes or other big servers that's barely 1MB RAM?
"Barely?"
It's insane to lump vacuum tubes together with servers with 1 MB RAM. My first PC, which I used for a decade, had 640KB RAM. And that was an upgrade from 512 KB RAM. My other PC had only 128KB RAM. None of these were considered the equivalent of (by then long dead) vacuum tubes in their day.
Yeah 1 MB is too big for my part. But I mean is there anyone hacking with computers in 50s when it's still vacuum tubes and to get 100KB RAM you already need "supercomputer".
I'm still curious on how much this is an artefact of less participants that run >150km marathons. The link in the other comment compiles data over lots of runners from lots of marathons, but I still haven't found data about how much actually runs the >150km marathons.
About the risk part, I'm still not really sure how third world countries traffic change the equation. There are a lot of them so cars have to already account for them by default. The sheer quantity also makes traffic slower, and when accidents do happen, when it's between motorcycles there's not that much energy involved compared to cars accident. Also people here rarely have motorcycle with >150cc so accident impact is reduced even further.
About that old Slate Star Codex article, I find it amazing that no one in that 70+ comment section of presumably smart and Rational people, bothered to look up to see if there were interventional studies on bullying.
Dan Olweus did several of them in the 70s and 80s, and fought to his dying day against programs which didn't have casual intervention studies backing them.
Strangely I also easily solve insane, then I try extreme. First I can solve with difficulty, second I almost gave up and it do need some whole board logic. Haven't tried third.
It's still funny how much it's celebrated because it brings down establishments, not realizing it'll also bring down their own. Reminds me of why no one should start biological warfare.
MAD is another one, the concept of firing your nuke means you lost. So you have to spend a lot of money to have said nuke and keep it available, just so you DON'T use it...
reply