mheiler

Apple is taking sides with the oppressors. Shameful but predictable: "When it comes to hanging the capitalists they will sell us the rope." (supposedly Lenin)

It's an improvement for the people in China.

Nestle is trying to avoid the trap Coke and McDonalds fell into: Only offering unhealthy food choices and loosing the young generation of health-conscious consumers. They can't go the Wholefoods way since organic is inherently more expensive and harder to scale. Nestle is a food-tech company that wants to feed the globe. Now they try to do it in a more healthy way. I don't know why Bloomberg is so negative about that.

A while ago I did a Contemplation course where you do sitting & walking meditation for ~9h / day. The experience was very similar. It's fascinating when you look into spiritual practices of different religions: There is so much in common. E.g., when you read from Buddhist teachers vs. Catholic saints vs. modern mindfulness meditation. I strongly recommend to pick up one of these and experience them.

More than AI I would like to see standardisation and templates for common law problems. Like what creative commons did for copyright. Normal humans can use and very quickly understand them.

I have absolutely no interest in reading dozens of terms of service or purchase contracts I use every day, which are all wordy and hard to read, and say basically the same.

Icons are little symbols that are equally incomprehensible in any language.

I didn't know that McKinsey knows Tech.

Someone finally ran a real study. I wish companies would run such experiments much, much more often.

Same here. It's a shame since otherwise this ~5y old computer still is holding up well.

I like that it's short.

The nice thing about the paper is that they try to put data where others put guesses, rants, expectations, and believes. Arguing with data is actually difficult (and rare) in the software engineering field.

The practical result is that language choice doesn't matter since the effects are very small.

Making drugs legally available in pharmacies would lead to: (1) organised crime looses a large chunk of its business, (2) no need for dealers to advertise to new users, they won't get the business anyways, (3) drugs would have medical-grade quality control and likely be cheaper than on the black market, (4) drugs can be taxed and this money can go into prevention and medical care, (5) users are less likely to need to commit crimes to support their habit, (6) resources in law enforcement get freed for other things.

The ethical question is if drug use would go up and thus a legalise-drugs policy would be guilty of leading people down a bad and potentially deadly path. If the article is right that won't be so.

Summary: No article containing the word "methodology" is worth reading. Instead, spend time talking and listening and understanding exactly which problem you need to solve.