zweep

But those preschools build immunity.

Dating apps cater to men ~9-10 and women ~4-10. Many women would rather have sex once every two weeks with a polygamous man they consider a "9" than sex every night with a monogamous man they consider a "5". This has always been true but dating apps have enabled it at scale in society-transforming ways.

This isn't just speculation, it's from data that OKCupid blogged and then un-blogged when they were acquired by Match.

The wildly unbalanced gender ratio makes men frustrated, which causes them to invest very little in reaching out to women so that they can reach out to dozens/hundreds/thousands, which makes an experience for women of thousands of dick pics/"hey"/etc, along with earnest high-investment outreach from men who are too ugly/poor/short/whatever to capture their interest.

If there was a system for people in the 25th to 75th percentiles of desirability to have a dating market where the men were only allowed to contact 3 women per month, I think it would be very popular among women.

It's very effective for humidification, the difference is immediately noticeable. The room is probably 100 square feet, I'm only humidifying it at night, so by your calculation it should take only about half a gallon of water which is probably what fits on a towel give or take.

This was one of the early theories about how Facebook would monetize -- that your real-life friends would value their relationship with you too highly to recommend anything but truly great products to you. That hit the reality that people would squander most of their friends for their stupid MLM scheme.

It’s obviously not precise. But roughly after that you are making about a million a year minimum in cash flow and can think about spending $250k+ on custom software.

To mildly humidify my baby son’s room without having to maintain a humidifier, I use a towel soaked in water, draped over a chair, with a fan pointed at it overnight.

Nobody doing marketplaces etc. should be using anything but off-the-shelf software until $10 million annual revenue.

What I mean is that, with some things like music, I can say that this recording is better than this one because the musician is playing with better dynamics, or better pacing, etc, but with two chocolate cakes from a restaurant I can only say “this one is better.” I can’t give any advice to the chefs. Typesetting is like the latter, I can say “this looks better” but can’t say “it’s because the margins are wider” or the serifs are fatter.

What does context-free syntax mean? And what does “you cannot parse it” mean? Meaning you can’t stream it, you need the whole file first?

How is TeX terrible? I’d appreciate it if you could calibrate your response roughly to my level of discernment, which is to perceive LaTeX documents as better looking than Microsoft Word, but not be able to articulate why, or have much finer grained resolution than that.

I think that in 2020, everyone outside of a specifically secured facility should assume that are being recorded at all times.

One is Apple or Netflix and the other isn’t. I don’t feel comfortable sharing more specificity than that.

I can tell you that two FAANGs implement GDPR compliance for everyone because they didn’t want to risk getting a user’s EU status wrong.

This sounds a bit like Comic Book Guy. For every person who has the opinion that Excel is “so crappy” there are probably 100 like myself who place it in the highest category of application software quality, with applications like Gmail and Adobe After Effects. You can prepare a list of weaknesses of any of these, the same way you could write about all of the mistakes that Michael Jordan made in basketball games.