trylfthsk

A point against: if someone was an early adopter in a community that urbanized over 30 years, in effect the increased value means their future ownership at present rates requires the collective subsidy of their neighbors. Young families subsidizing the elderly in this way is a huge issue in tax burden disparity where I live.

Why not just subsidize this directly then?

Also a graduate of NOLS WEMT, and it was one of the best-run educational experiences I've been through (Including Undergrad, Masters, professional development, etc).

Highly, highly recommend paying them a visit - truly a special organization, though I've neglected trying out one of their proper expeditions.

I'm midway through a similar journey - jumped from engineering to fire then into armed forces. At the back of my head I can always go back to the office, but the passage of time guarantees the reverse is much harder.

To anyone that has even thought of something more outside an office, try it so long as you're physically able. Compensation is one thing, but the experience for me has been priceless.

Same feedback - conditional probability until you eventually straight pipe a 100% reliability sorter to the solution. I think one workaround is to have a max reliability for the level - say 95% - requiring actual infrastructure in the long run.

Not entirely convinced that outside the torment nexuses used in industrial meat farming, natural suffering is any lesser sans humanity.

40mg Rosuvastatin + 10mg ezetimibe + leqvio did this precisely for my n=1.

Is anyone surprised when YouTube shows a million "you won't believe this one simple trick involving lemon juice to reverse diabetes" type ads?

I'd be shocked if now was the time to have standards of any sort.

Topical, with RAGBRAI just around the corner. I'm constantly awed at just revolutionary the bicycle seems to be from an industrialization perspective. To me, bicycles and smartphones are two real thick lines to draw on when the world became something different.

As much as I like to scientifically validate my drug dependency, is the EEG work here really that much more rigorous than a polygraph? I see a lot of domain specific terms like "FOOOF algorithm", filtering signal spectra etc. and the geist of my schooling asks me whether the elephant is wiggling its trunk.

I can understand his distaste for the indefinite, but does he actually make a strong case for the opposite?

To me this reads as claiming "making fragile choices is good", which outside of very niche situations I'd say is bad advice: like telling a college basketball player to not waste time outside of practice and later watching him go undrafted in the pros.

This does make me wonder what kinds of secrets can and can't be kept; on the face of it, that a critical bit of insider information would be kept for oral transmission at particular times (something like a mystery cult) leads me to think that keeping such a secret is at least possible.

At the same time, people love gossip.

Of course, the only secrets we know from the past were by definition not exactly well-kept.

Thank you for this; surprised I haven't heard much about him prior, since I've been digging into political economy lately.

Specifically, his notes on consumption / full employment are refreshing - it never sits right with me that the goal of economic policy at a high level is so often at odds with doing things in a "smart" way (measuring projects in jobs created, for example).

Is it worth the effort for any individual poster though? The unreachable segment (read only, doesn't comment) which already makes up the vast majority of audience is practically un-engageable. Among commenters, there's the blend of low-effort 'this'-type posts, soliloquizers (though possible therapeutic for the poster), and lizardman-constant/flame type reactions. It seems that in most venues, the effort to read through all comments and find anything valuable to engage with has a low social ROI.