modbait

I've noticed that reading "new" with showdead enabled make a lot of pretty interesting stuff available that's not on the front page. A bit of moderation might be useful, but in HN's case, it's so heavy that it seems to remove value.

I'm reminded of the Upton Sinclair quote: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

Been there. Unless you have an IOU, anything "given" before marriage is utterly gone, and you won't get any credit for it during the division of assets or determination of alimony.

No good deed goes unpunished.

Fascinating quotes, but the design of that page is almost a war crime.

I've pretty much been taking a name, rank, and serial number-only approach. My family is my priority, and taking unnecessary risks (as I used to) to help someone who might file a complaint now seems foolish.

I like it, and have considered adding something like this for my next project. Does seem a bit wordy, though.

My version: 1. Don't be an ass. 2. Anyone who mentions "Code of Conduct" will be immediately banned.

If you don't think you'll be able to act professionally as a team member, yes, the professional thing to do is to resign. So, in other words, do what you need to do to act professionally. No one can object to that.

Ergo, she's an accused murderer! Your move, Socrates!

To be frank, unsure of whether complaining about poor grammar or word overuse.

It's absolutely appalling that a corporation whose scientific professionalism is relied upon by so many would jump in for a cheap shot on this. (It's even more appalling that they're simply wrong on the science, as others have noted.)

...then fling it right into that envelope!

Given that a single tweet can (now) ruin your life, allowing minors on Twitter seems like rank irresponsibility.

Well, first off, they need to standardize on the spelling... ;-)

The author states that intelligence is an unqualified benefit--more is always better--and uses that assertion to argue against populations evolving in differing areas having different IQ distributions. That's far from obvious. Rather, those who are far outliers on this measure often seem to have other issues, quite possibly as a concomitant result.

Selective breeding performed slowly over longer time scales did at least give the breeders time to notice some kinds of severe problems. If you're breeding wheat and accidentally introduce a toxic mutation, you might notice the resulting pile of dead horses. There won't be a warning like this in every case, but it's not right to say that there's zero benefit to going slow.

That said, I don't really have an opinion on GMOs. I'm fine with you partaking first, though. :-)

Good on you, buddy!

One trick you might try wrt chocolate in particular: Try darker and darker chocolates. If you can get up to 90% or even 99%, you can get your chocolate hit with little in the way of sugar or calories.