Hmm... Interesting question. Not a lot of time, on average. Even at home, there's always some sort of management or planning to do. Always need to think about what comes next. But the busyness comes in waves. Occasionally I get a week with really nothing to do. And then, inversely, there are weeks where everything is happening all at once and it starts to feel like I can't keep up and things are starting to slip. I'm currently in one of those weeks, but I'm sure it'll pass. Just need to get through it. That's the life of a researcher for you. There's definitely a level of masochism required for this sort of lifestyle
- Posts
- 3
- Comments
- 218
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
- Posts
- 3
- Comments
- 218
- Joined
- 3 yr. ago
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
I recommend trying out OnlyOffice. It's free and it's scarily similar to MS Office, to the point where there's no learning curve and it's impressive how they haven't gotten sued yet. Plus, it's got a Windows version so you can try it out without committing to Linux
I'm not a fan of LibreOffice, even with the GUI tweaks to make it look like MS Office, so I've been actively finding Office alternatives for a long time now. OnlyOffice is by far the best one I've found
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
If you're curious, then I would recommend you play around with Linux before something breaks. It's a horrible experience to have to scramble to figure out what to do when you're tight on time - better to learn the lingo first, so that when something does break, you can switch with no learning curve.
Plus, you might end up really liking Linux anyways. That's kinda what happened to me 2 years ago, I'm not honestly sure why I haven't tried Linux sooner
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
The problem that you're describing is that people aren't being socialized properly. The solution to that problem isn't to give people a chatbot, it's to socialize them properly.
It is going to happen, and it has already happened, but that's not really a future that we should strive for. IMO too much damage has already been done and there needs to be laws put into place to severely regulate AI companies
Nothing serious, but he's well known for being impossible to work with. He has gotten into multiple arguments because he refuses to follow kernel development rules. When called out on it, he makes a big stink about it. Obviously his code doesn't get merged. Then he does the exact same thing again 1 month later.
He has gotten into multiple arguments with Linus Torvalds over his refusal to simply follow the kernel development rules. During those arguments he has made cheap shots at completely unrelated people, which then drags those people into the argument.
It's gotten to the point where apparently a significant portion of the kernel developers feel like he was negatively impacting the kernel, and Linus eventually removed his code from the kernel.
He's what you might call a Linux lolcow. And now he's doing even more lolcow things by... Getting weirdly attached to his LLM-sona
Other than locking the janitor in the bathroom, feels like a funny and harmless senior prank
I mean... If we treated the sun to be just another star (ie, if the astronomers got their way), the planets would probably be called Sol b, Sol c, Sol d, Sol e, Sol f, Sol g, Sol h, and Sol i.
Sol a would be reserved for the sun, of course.
That would only encourage billionaires to nope off into space fantasy land (and of course they would still maintain power over governments). As it is right now, billionaires being on the same planet as normal people is at least incentivizing them to keep the planet in somewhat hospitable conditions.
As it is now, the best course of action would be to depose billionaires more quickly than they can escape off-planet. And to do it in a public and spectacular way to put fear into the billionaires
Realistically, most of the antibiotic resistance issues actually arise from antibiotic usage in farm animals. Turns out you get better and fatter growth if you microdose animals with antibiotics. Plus there's the added benefit that you don't need to care as much about animal hygiene or illnesses if they're just always on antibiotics. Of course, that's the perfect circumstance for promoting antibiotic resistance. And at the current massive scale of animal farming, antibiotic resistance spreads quickly.
But, you know, that's an acceptable cost when you consider all the shareholder value that you create by having slightly fatter animals.
Funny thing is, antibiotic resistance is an energetically costly adaptation, and studies show that as long as you drop antibiotic usage below a certain amount, evolution would actually favor deleting antibiotic resistance genes. In other words, if we stopped using antibiotics on farm animals, a large amount of antibiotic resistance would just evaporate basically overnight. Then realize that that would never happen with our current governments
My understanding is that rice doesn't need to be soaking in water, either, but it helps with the weeds, since rice can survive the water but not other plants
I get what you mean. I've suspected it's a combination of factors:
- People have a name for it now. You can't announce or be prideful about something that you don't have a name for
- People are more accepting of autism now. You'd be more incentivized to hide autism if people thought it was a bad thing
- Autistic people tend to attract other autistic people. If you know one autistic person, you probably know a whole bunch of other autistic people too
But also, I just think that a lot of people underestimated how many people were autistic back then. A lot of high-functioning autistic people can pass for normal until you really get to know them. For instance, I'm like 99% sure that both of my parents are high-functioning autistic, and nobody ever suspected they might be. I brought up the possibility to them and their response was just, "yeah, I figured."
You know how there's the old schoolhouse stereotype that there's always a "weird kid" in every class? There's a good chance that kid was an undiagnosed autist.
The current estimates for autism rates is around 1 in 30. Which means every classroom is expected to have 1 autistic kid. Matches perfectly with the "weird kid in class" stereotype. People recognized autism since forever. That's why the stereotype exists. It's just that they didn't have an actual word for it yet.
My experience has been that you need to pay attention to what I call the "satiety-to-calorie ratio." Some foods have really good ratios, meaning you feel full without a lot of calories. Some foods have really poor ratios, meaning you get a lot of calories but still feel hungry afterwards. Start keeping track of how full you feel after eating a meal or a snack, and also keep track of how many calories it has.
You will be surprised by some of the results. Some of what would be considered healthy foods can have pretty poor ratios and some of what would be considered unhealthy can have pretty good ratios. Obviously, the issue here is that we're only factoring in calories, not nutrients, so this isn't the end-all-be-all system that you need to follow. But if weight loss is your primary objective, this is a good starting metric.
You'll want to cut out or minimize foods that have a low ratio, and keep foods that have a good ratio. Keep a couple of good-ratio snacks for when you crave snacks. That way, you can satisfy cravings without getting too many extra calories.
I find that it helps me to set a daily calorie limit and aim to keep under it. Going over the limit is fine, but the extra calories get rolled over and need to be paid off over the next days. If you don't know the calories of foods that you ate, give your best estimate. You'll get better at estimating over time as you pay attention to the calories of the foods that you do know.
Also, when you cook, make sure to add in the calories from oil. And if you just need a way to drop your calories rapidly, I find that Soylent or Huel have remarkably good ratios and taste like milkshake, though they are somewhat expensive.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Humans also utilize a ton of their available calories to maintain their large brains rather than basically anything else in their body. We basically made a hyper minmax build
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Only under hotter, dryer conditions. Under wetter and cooler conditions, the inefficiency of C3 is offset by the extra steps required for C4, which makes C3 favored in those conditions
It depends on which part of your eye is nonfunctional. It turns out there's multiple redundancies for sensing light, so you could be blind but still be submitting signals to your circadian clock. If your eyes are completely nonfunctional, then yeah you'd have a pretty screwed up clock.
- JumpDeleted
A question for those who have a partner, how did you manage to do it and how long did it take?
Young-ish introvert guy here. It's definitely getting harder and harder over time. IMO the big problem is that nowadays, people don't need to learn to communicate. And so many people never learn. There's too many interesting things to do while you lock yourself away in your house. In the past, even introverts had to learn to communicate. What else were they going to do? Sit and stare at the wall?
What's the solution? Well, you have to be more deliberate with your time and effort. You need to learn to communicate, so learn to communicate. My rule of thumb is that, on average, you need to spend at least half of your waking day outside. Whether for work, or hobby, or shopping, etc. - being outside for any reason is infinitely more useful for socializing than staying indoors.
Also, don't stagnate. It's very easy to get comfortable with what you've been doing and to keep doing what you've been doing. Again, be deliberate about how you choose to spend your time. Pick up new skills. Learn new hobbies. Try out new restaurants. Explore a bit. The more you learn, the better you get at learning. Become well-rounded, knowledgeable, cultured.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
A broad statement like "trees consume carbon dioxide" would actually be an incredible paper to publish because it means that there is 1. a lot of interesting data that could back up a statement so broad and 2. extremely applicable to a wide variety of fields. When I say "uninteresting," I really mean a very specific type of uninteresting, like "sunlight does not affect the growth of the fungus Neurospora crassa. " It's uninteresting because it doesn't really tell us what affects the growth of the fungus, only that sunlight does not. If you got this result, you likely wouldn't even feel like it's information that's worth making public, hence the lack of papers that have these sorts of results. But, if it weren't published, then grad students across the globe would keep testing sunlight and keep finding the same thing again and again, wasting time and money. Hence the argument that all data should be published, regardless of how useless the results are
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
No reason, I suppose. In my opinion it seems to just be a holdover from the previous systems of publishing. The prestige of a journal is ranked based on how often it gets cited (or in other words, how influential the papers are within the journal). Publishing insignificant/uninteresting data would lower a journal's average citation count, which would make it seem less prestigious than other journals. Hence journals are incentivized to only publish interesting data. It's a shitty system that everyone knows is shitty but nobody has a good solution for how to fix it
If you have any concerns or questions about your relationship, it is a really good idea to talk to him and sort it out before it becomes an issue.
The relationship being something other than what you wanted isn't the worst thing that can happen. The worst thing that can happen is if you didn't know that that was the case.