abstractbarista

It just doesn't seem like that big a deal to me.

That may be the target, but the real outcome is simply delaying those deaths, spreading them out more over time.

Yes. Gambling should be legal anyway.

They stated something as fact to influence our behavior, when they did not actually have the requisite knowledge to make such a statement at that point in time.

They should have instead said "We don't know whether they're effective yet, so don't hoard them, because doing so could cause X."

There's nothing wrong with admitting you don't know something yet.

Instead, they make commands without supporting evidence. That implies total disregard for the peoples' intelligence. Upon realizing this, trust is lost and dissenting actions increase.

Does this happen more often per mile driven than human drivers?

I respect what you're saying and honestly it is shitty. It is true, I deleted the many technical posts I made because I did not want to leave that value on the site to support what is has become.

I feel bad about it. I hope people are able to find my posts in archived formats somewhere. But I just didn't feel comfortable on there any more. Reading around there is just gross now. I think I will concentrate on posting on my own website now.

It is time: I've deleted my account after clearing all posts and comments. Don't want to leave anything of value behind.

Guess I'm not viewing Twitter links any more. Hopefully they realize that not everyone cares. We just opt-out, 100%. Oh well.

I think most people can stop.

I also think most people lack the resolve to stop.

I've read that "Your body adjusts to input, so it's not that easy!" many times now. I don't dispute it is true.

But why not call the body's bluff? Cut input further! And then cut it again. Be more stubborn than your body.

Not saying it would be easy. It would probably be really hard. Not sure if I could actually do it if I had to. But surely, it is possible?! What little physics I know seems to strongly support it.

Is there data to back up an individual 'set-point'? People think differently, so I can only speak to myself:

If I was heavier than desired, and I noticed my body was gaining weight while I am suppressing caloric intake, I would reduce intake even further. Call the bluff.

Of course, easier said than done. It's perhaps a masochistic mindset, forcing yourself to feel hunger, and obstinately refusing to give in. Since I was young, my conscious response to hunger seems different than many. I can easily ignore it for hours, if I am focused on something interesting. Hunger is an annoyance I typically ignore. The body screams "Wahh, I'm hungry! I'm going to make you feel bad until I eat!" and my internal voice says "Go right ahead. Suck it up, you're fine. I'm having too much fun to tend to you. Maybe you get something in a few hours."

If anything, I probably don't eat 'enough'. But I don't try to eat less. I eat whatever I want whenever I want. I am very happy with my weight. I eat a wide variety of nutritious food. But ultimately it's just annoying that we have to eat at all.

Yea, it is a rather mean culture. Fascinating to watch, but scary as well.

This stuff is exactly why I loved statistics in college!

The frustrating thing is, there is no way to verbalize the meaning of this data, without immediately being labeled a 'bigoted right-winger'.

People just don't want to hear it. I tend to believe all people have the capability to understand this nuance. Unfortunately, they openly refuse, because it contradicts their perceptions.

It's honestly kind of scary.

They are also perfect for gun cleaning! Cut small squares for cleaning barrels, and keep bigger pieces for wiping down parts. I do this with my old nasty shirts.

Was the occupant of the impacted vehicle wearing a seatbelt? The article does not say. I am just curious. This question implies no stance or statement.