bykovich2

I didn't read this as an investment thesis. I don't think he's trying to prescribe an investment strategy.

> Doing nothing can be as equally energising as time out spent with people, and is in fact necessary in order to recharge, says Pedro Diaz, CEO of the Workplace Mental Health Institute in Sydney.

Hmm, who's this guy?

> Driven by an obsession for better outcomes in workplace mental health, Pedro Diaz founded The Workplace Mental Health Institute as a boutique educational resource for managers serious about creating immediate and sustainable changes for their organisation’s mental health.

What's a "boutique educational resource"? That's a phrase I've never in my days encountered.

This article is stating nothing but the obvious: that living by a calendar maniacally filled to bursting is not the road to happiness.

> "We find that people who are dual-centric tend to be healthier, do better at work and do better at home," says Galinsky [co-founder of the Families and Work Institute].

"Dual-centric" apparently means "not monomaniacal."

Weakness of will.

> There can be 'unlimited growth' - as long as there is innovation.

How's that work, bud?

> Life is a complicated symphony of events, it isn't easy to arrange a perfect solution on your own.

Implicit here is the assumption that there is a problem (life itself?) to which a solution can be arranged, and that "arranging a perfect solution" is a worthy aim.

Why does one need to seek a "solution" to a symphony?

One might go so far as to say that substance and sustenance of life dwells in those holes. I won't go so far, but someone (not me, of course) might.

Not exactly: Mayella Ewell and Tom Robinson did not, in fact, have sex. Tom rebuffed Mayella's advances, and Bob Ewell concocted a rape as retribution for Mayella's attraction to a black man. However, the book strongly implies that, at some earlier point, Bob Ewell himself had actually raped Mayella -- perhaps habitually. It's not lingered upon, but the implication, while brief, is difficult to oppose.

If you run an online store that doesn't validate credit cards correctly you will become an API for fraudsters to check the validity of Visa numbers.

Isn't this explicitly not a theory of consciousness?

"Calorie restriction is proven to help you live a longer life."

Flatly untrue. The article linked to "in proof" is about primate studies that suggest -- perhaps even strongly suggest -- that caloric restriction can slow the process of aging. This does not, however, rise to the level of proof, and certainly does not provide conclusive indication of what caloric restricters can expect more generally. The author is apparently willing to make this grandiose claim to a susceptible audience with nary a word about its limitations, which should set our alarm bells ringing.

If you want to calorically restrict, do it because you've thought long and hard about the consequences of a truly significant choice -- not because it's a tech industry fad.

I believe the point was that selling a kid to pay for the others is a suggestion similarly (if not identically) indifferent to emotional realities as suggesting that a committedly-married couple get a divorce to change their tax status.

How do you figure that "besides for housing, cost of living does not need to be particularly higher in SV than elsewhere"? While housing is undeniably the most wildly out-of-control expense in Silicon Valley, the rest of the essentials of life ain't cheap either.