barleymash

Any reading on stoicism that you recommend?

Constant scrolling through Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, etc. The content is pretty much endless. Lots of people, given any moment of downtime, pull out their phones, scroll, scroll, scroll, open an article, skim it, go back, scroll, scroll, scroll, like some photos, read some captions, scroll, scroll, scroll.

And people can also _not_ want to use social media for their own personal reasons. That doesn't make them holier-than-thou, or a hipster, or condescending just because they make the less popular choice.

Do you feel like your "new" schedule is more beneficial than it was before?

John* Kidd :)

early 30s

That last sentence is an interesting point. The reason I stumbled onto this plan in the first place, is that I've had years of digestive discomfort, and realized that my system seems to handle starchy foods better. So I did some research on that, and learned that starchy foods are often the easiest for your body to digest and process.

Right. My limited understanding of this--and keep in mind I'm just regurgitating what I've read from those who support this way of eating--is that novo lipogenesis is a very inefficient process, and that you'd have to overeat a significant amount of _simple_ sugars for basically months to store even just a pound of body fat. I think the idea with this eating plan is, if you are keeping fat low, you will fill up on starchy foods long before you will eat enough calories/carbs to cause novo lipogenesis.

Definitely open to hearing counterpoints here... trying to learn about this stuff is overwhelming because it seems like you can find material, even scholarly research, to support any nutrition plan.

I've been trying the opposite lately -- a high carb diet. I've mostly been modeling my eating style after Dr. McDougall's "Starch Solution" plan. He basically believes that humans are designed to eat starchy foods (potatoes, whole grains, etc), and that fats are bad (healthy fats -- like from avocados -- aren't necessarily unhealthy, but aren't great if you are trying to lose weight). So one of the core tenets of this plan is to keep fat and protein very low, and roughly an 80/10/10 percentage of carbs/protein/fat, which means cooking without oils, butter, etc.

The staple of my diet is potatoes. I eat potatoes nearly every day, and I eat a lot of them. My favorite way is to slice them up into wedges, add some spices, bake them, and then dip them in mustard. I also eat lots of rice, beans, oatmeal, bread, occasionally something like cheerios for a snack, etc.

The beauty of this plan is that if you stick to resistant starches, and keep fat low, you don't need to count calories. You will likely feel full before you will overeat calories. I'm down about 15 pounds since starting in February (6 ft tall, down from 195 to 180ish), and I've got the most ab definition I've ever had from JUST a diet (I'm barely doing any cardio right now). But more importantly, I feel really good.

Anyway, this is not to undermine a ketogenic diet. I think both are effective ways to feel good and look good... either eating low enough carbs that your body burns fat (Keto), or eating low enough fat that your body isn't storing any. I just enjoy experimenting with different ways of eating, and this one happens to be working great for me right now.

I'm not sure I agree with this. Do you think an otherwise good person/employee with a newfound ability to work remote would become an asshole and abuse the privilege? Seems like they'd probably be an asshole to begin with. Also, if someone is an asshole and taking advantage of the flexibility, why not fire them? I'm not sure how keeping them in an office solves this issue of people being bad employees.

The difficult scenario is if you really enjoy your job. I work at a company that I have almost nothing to complain about... flexible, great benefits, no micromanagement, challenging and stimulating work. However, I do feel that I am slightly underpaid. It is hard to _really_ know what the environment would be like at a new company if I was willing to walk. I guess the hard thing (for me) is quantifying the importance of the other factors besides money.

> Closures in JS are basically objects that have only one public property (called apply).

Never heard it explained this way. Can you elaborate a bit? I'm not sure I follow. Couldn't a closure have any of the same properties that other functions have? Call, apply, bind, length, etc, etc.

This is absolute garbage. How can you state that users of a language are unsophisticated? You can make the argument that certain languages ALLOW you to be an unsophisticated developer, have lower barriers to entry, or give you enough rope to hang yourself, etc. But your logic here just does not make any sense. How can you call someone unsophisticated for KNOWING something?

I would bet that most developers know more than one language. So what if you develop with Python, C++, and Node? Does the singular fact that you develop with Node make you a shitty programmer?